There aren't very many sports analysts I respect more than Bill James.  The latest version of Penn State basketball, along with a random link from this morning I can no long track down, lead me to something he wrote back in March:

There comes a time in a relationship when a woman will still answer your phone calls, but you're wasting your money buying flowers; you know what I'm saying?

[...]

The Jayhawks usually win by 15 or 20 points, and sometime in about 1968 I started wondering whether there wasn't some way to decide when the game was no longer in doubt. I began to experiment with heuristic inventions to try to find the moment at which the line was crossed. A heuristic could be loosely defined as a mathematical rule that works even though no licensed mathematician would be caught dead associating with it.

A heuristic can more literally be defined as "a method that often rapidly leads to a solution that is usually reasonably close to the best possible answer". A "rule of thumb" is another way to describe it.

Click through to read more about the formula, but the basic gist is that you need to maintain a strong "safety margin" in order to guard against quick scores in order to lock up a win.

And he's fully aware that the improbable does happen.

It's really unusual for a team to come from 16 back with four to play and win, but it does happen. I would guess it happens twice a year somewhere in the world of college basketball.

He says this, perhaps, because this happened once.

Continue reading this post »

Some thoughts about the Fiesta Bowl, seen in blue and white...

All Growns Up.  Jim Tressel is going to grow up and be exactly like Joe Paterno. The old man used to have a big enough talent advantage against his opponents to successfully use the zero-risk, zero-reward model; now that Ohio State has established itself as the most talented team in the Big Ten,Tressel is all of the sudden falling under its spell. I thought OSU's only chance was to come out with higher risk plays and do things no one had seen them do. Minus the two quarterback system, which was really just a mash up of Ohio State's last two years of offense, they did none of this. A lot of up the middle runs, no risks on 4th down and, of course, several long field goal attempts. I don't know if the adaptation of the model Paterno made famous has anything to do with their Big Ten success and Big Stage failures, but it is something to think about.

You know what the worst part about the strategy is, too? That sometimes it works. And even worse, sometime is almost works. Like last night.

There Is Always The Future.  Pryor is very athletic, and despite what seems like a slow acceleration he can fly. That being said, he has a long way to go. The Rivalry, Esq. noted that Ohio State sported the "most efficient" passing attack in the Big Ten, but this is only because Tressel was smart enough to realize he should only throw the kid when absolutely necessary. He makes up for all of this with his size, he's very difficult to bring down and his two receptions (one negated because of a push off) do a lot to show how much taller and stronger he is even as a freshman.  He is something to look out for, of course, but there is no guarantee he'll go from pretty good to elite.  Nothing a good defensive line and quick linebackers can't handle.

And what was with him repeatedly running out of bounds five to ten yards before he had to last night?

Up And Down And Back Up Again.  At first it seemed like Todd Boeckman's inclusion in the game plan was a hat tip from his coach and a reward for being a good teammate. In reality, it was a desperate act made necessary by the fact that Tressel wanted to throw the ball more than 20 times a game (good for a dead last in the conference and a eye catching 116th nationally).

This bodes well for the rest of the Big Ten next season. With Boeckman leaving and Well's likely entering the draft, Ohio State is in faced with becoming dangerously one-dimensional. Ohio State is always loaded with talent, so this is subject to change depending on the players we haven't seen yet, but they lose enough players this year and have enough difficult road games ahead to slide a bit next season.

Six In One Hand.  Like most of you, I didn't like all the soft zone defense Bradley decided to play in the Rose Bowl. Last night, Tressel thought he had the athletes to play man defense against Texas.

See? It can suck just as bad.

Ah, the tradition and pure innocent joy of the Granddaddy.  Isn't is great?

Wait, what's that?

While Paterno being a no-show on the field is an interesting thing to note, I'm not really sure bringing up contractual obligations and fines is in the spirit of the whole Rose Bowl pregame thing. 

Besides, how many interviews did he do in the last two weeks?  And going further, how much worthwhile information has he given up to sideline reporters in the last 20 years?  Is it really worth getting on half of your viewers' bad side just to take a soft shot at an 82 year old man who is recovering from hip surgery and wants to be left alone for 10 minutes?

As for the potential fine and its importance:

• Lisa's huffy threat, a full $10,000, represents 0.033% of the Rose Bowl payout.  Penn State takes home half of that, so 0.067% of Penn State's share.
• Of course Penn State splits that with the conference, so it's more like 0.733% of what the Nittany Lions pocket.
• That fine represents about 2% of Paterno's base pay, which doesn't include endorsements and such.
• As part of the Rose Bowl gift package, every participating player was given a One-year ESPN The Magazine subscription. This fine is valued at about 4 million of those.
• If Joe does get fined, which he wont, and his employer picks it up, which it would, breaking this contractual obligation that Paterno probably didn't even know existed would cost the school 0.0003% of their total operating budget.
• The monetary value of the bad publicity ESPN/ABC would create if they actually followed through with this is estimated about $12 kattraillathousand.

So it’s easy to believe, like Lisa said, that Paterno doesn’t really care.

Tom Hoffarth of the L.A. Daily News published this response:

An ESPN spokesman reitereated [sic] that the network asked Paterno for a pregame interview "as we are entitled to receive as the rightsholder and he declined. Any questions regarding a fine should be directed to Penn State, the BCS and the Rose Bowl. It's not our call."

What is kind of interesting in this whole ESPN making their own news non-story is that Lisa Salters is actually a former Lady Lion basketball player and 1988 Penn State graduate (scouts story from 2005 here).  Is she really that upset?  Or just acting like it for the cameras?  The gasp as the beginning of her bit and the tone at the end make me think it might be the former. 

I suppose it would have probably been the highlight of her air time, but I'm not sure I fully understand the problem.  I have to think there are hundreds of these little "contractual obligations" in the agreement, with dozens of them being broken every year...so why this one was worth mentioning I'm not exactly sure, although I guess it's easy enough guess. 

The time for garbage stories from the LA Times are over.  The game in finally upon us and, as is the BSD custom, we offer up our expectations.

Mike says...

Continue reading this post »

It is very much unlike ESPN to exaggerate or talk in absolutes, so I was especially taken back when they starting discussing the 2008 USC team as possibly one of the best defensive teams of all time.

And so I was obviously compelled to pull the numbers.  As always, we stress context, context, context.  Here are USC's opponents, their scoring and total offense rank nationally (out of 119 teams) and how each performed against TBDOAT:

And Penn State, who is no slouch on defense either:

[Remember that Penn State didn't play Minnesota (82/91) or Northwestern (74/62).  Also, I was forced to exclude Coastal Carolina as they really can't be compared to D1a programs and don't have a D1a rank.]

And a summary:

Bullets?  Sure.

• Of the 20 worst total offenses in D1a, these two teams played 8 of them.  That's going to skew things a little bit.
• USC has three shutouts this season, all of them are against teams ranked in the bottom 20.
• When you look at the average rank of opponents it looks like these teams played a similar slate of talent.  The somewhat subtle difference is that USC played more absolutely terrible teams, but then some decent ones.  PSU's opponents are less extreme.
  

So who's defense is the best of all time evah?  I hate even asking that questing because it doesn't make any sense and can't be determined anyway, but based on the level of competition each played (offensively, I mean), I think it is safe to say that neither one is completely out of this world.  Both have performed very well, but both have also faced a relatively weak slate; an average around 65 is nothing to print billboards about.  Each has also had a couple of breakdowns.

So who's defense is better?  We had to go here, didn't we?  Well, again, it impossible to say for sure, but there is this to consider:

USC's scoring and total averages are better, and the level of competition is somewhat similar.  However, I quickly went back through the box scores and came up with this non-scientific stat: each team has blown out a lot of their opponents and weren't playing their first team defenses the entire game.  I estimate (and am relatively confident in these numbers) that USC has given up 9 garbage points, Penn State 21.  That brings the average numbers a little closer together.

Again, I don't think there is anything here that you can use to distinguish these teams. 

So what does it all mean?  Well, I think the game hinges on which offense is able to keep themselves together.  As is usually the case when two great defenses face off: turnovers are a very important stat.  It's going to be difficult to overcome a negative turnover margin when you probably aren't going to be given very many chances.

 
"It’s more aerodynamic, plus it keeps me in line for field goals." -David Buehler

Let's be straight for a minute: kickers are kind of out of place in football.  They are obviously important, but with the death of two-way players and increased specialization, someone who kicks a non-moving ball doesn't even have to be a decent athlete anymore.  Or even sober.

But that doesn't mean they can't be.  Enter USC place kicker David Buehler.  He's fast:

Of course, being a great athlete doesn't make you a great kicker, either. Considering he is often in favorable weather conditions and the best recruiting juggernaut UCS has to offer, well, his stats are a little underwhelming.

He didn't even attempt kicks in five of USC's 12 games, and only once hit more than one kick through the uprights in non-extra point situations.  He ranks dead last in the Pac-10 in FG attempted and, naturally, FG made.

Now a lot of this is on his team, a kicker can only kick when presented the opportunity, but Carroll hasn't sent Buehler out to kick a 50+ yarder all season, suggesting he lacks some confidence in this particular special teams unit (although to be fair, this is for some reason a common trend in the conference).  This is reinforced by Buehler's long on the season: just 43 yards.  This ranks him 9th in the conference, 96th nationally.

So what does it mean?  We'll it's hard to tell based on the sample size, but I'm confident in saying Buehler is no Kevin Kelly, something to consider if this game turns into the low scoring struggle the stats suggest it might.

 [photo credit: usc.freedomblogging.com, figures from statsheet.com/cfb/teams/]