Shorter analysis of the games this week, mainly because the games aren’t quite as good as most weeks.
Cal (-8) @ Washington State
(preseason pick: Cal)
This could be the best game of the week, especially given how well the Cougars have played of late. Ever since their week one blowout loss at Auburn, Wazzu has really turned it around and played at a much higher level, especially in their close loss to the Trojans two weeks ago. If they can replicate that performance, they definitely have a shot.
On the Other Hand:
Even in (arguably) Wazzu’s best game of the year, they still lost by six points. And truth be told, in the last couple of weeks Cal has played appreciably better than USC, which isn’t at all a good sign for the home team.
Bottom Line:
Maybe this game will be close, but it’s much more likely that it’ll be a relatively easy win for the Bears.
Cal 34, @ Washington State 14
UCLA @ Oregon (-9)
(preseason pick: Oregon)
At first glance, the Oregon Ducks just look too strong to be denied in this game. Aside from that one game last week in Berkeley, their offense has looked great, and their defense is solid as well. Dennis Dixon is a major talent, and there are just so many weapons that it’s really hard for a defense to put the clamps on them.
Moreover, with Ben Olson out injured, Cowan is now the starter for the Bruins, and it’s going to be extremely tough for him to make his first start in Autzen Stadium. Combine that with UCLA’s general tendency to struggle away from the Rose Bowl, and it’s easy to see why they could get in serious trouble here.
On the Other Hand:
You still have to keep in mind what happened to Oregon last week. Cal showed that a fast defense that played well could keep the Ducks in check, and Dixon showed that he’s still capable of having a very bad game from time to time. If he struggles again this week, you absolutely have to give UCLA a shot at the upset.
Bottom Line:
UCLA’s on the road and Oregon is looking for redemption. That’s all you need to know.
@ Oregon 28, UCLA 17
Arizona State @ USC (-18.5)
(preseason pick: ASU)
For a spread that is nearly three touchdowns wide, this looks like it has the potential to be an awfully close game. The Trojans have really been struggling to find themselves with Dwayne Jarrett out injured, and there’s no question that they’re vulnerable to a team that can come in and play well.
On the Other Hand:
However, the question is whether or not ASU can do that. Sure, they’re always lousy on the road, and sure, they’ve had plenty of issues this season, but this game could well be an exception. With such a high line and no one giving them any kind of shot (you can still get better than 10:1 on them in Vegas for instance), this is exactly the kind of game where they can play at their best. They’ve had a bye week to work things out, they have very little pressure, they have to be fired up to redeem themselves, and don’t forget that this team still has plenty of talent.
Bottom Line:
The Sun Devils obviously are capable of coming out flat and getting smoked. The Trojans are similarly capable of finally putting it all together and having a great game. However, I think this game will be a lot closer than anyone seems to expect, and while I’m not crazy enough to pick ASU, they do have a shot. Not a great shot, mind you, but still a shot.
@ USC 28, Arizona State 21
Arizona (-3.5) @ Stanford
(preseason pick: Stanford)
Let’s see: a lousy team with injury problems visits a lousy team with injury problems. I don’t know about you, but I’m scared of the lousy team with injury problems. On a more serious note, the Wildcats seem like an overall better team, but two things stand out as problems for me: first, they’ve been terrible on the road with two blowout losses, and second, I’m really not sold on Adam Austin at quarterback. The Wildcats will look good for most of the game, but somewhere along the line he’ll make a couple of game-changing mistakes.
@ Stanford 24, Arizona 21
Oregon State @ Washington (-9)
(preseason pick: Oregon State)
Oregon State on the road: pick against them until they give a reason to do otherwise, especially with a single digit spread (though a letdown for Washington is definitely a possibility).
@ Washington 31, Oregon State 17
National Games of the Week:
This is definitely a down week for interesting games around the country.
Florida (-1.5) @ Auburn
This could be a tough game to call, as you have to expect Auburn to come out fired up to try and turn their season around, while Florida might be a bit worn out after tough games against Alabama and LSU. Still, the Gators look really good, and Auburn has struggled enough that I just can’t go with them, even with home field and the emotion factor.
Florida 27, @ Auburn 20
Rutgers @ Navy (-2.5)
This could be an interesting game, as both teams are starting to look good. It could go either way, but I like Rutgers here, as they’ve already shown themselves to be able to play well on the road.
Rutgers 27, @ Navy 24
Michigan (-5.5) @ Penn State
It’s odd how this line has been moving downward all week. Certainly, the Lions have a shot at this game, given how well they always play at home, but this line just seems too low to me.
Michigan 28, @ Penn State 17
Bad Lines of the Week:
Baylor +26.5
The Bears have actually played pretty decently this year; do you really want to give such a huge amount of points against them?
Wisconsin -8
Just too few points for these teams, especially since the game’s in Madison. Even 10 wouldn’t be a terrible bet.
USF -3
The Bulls have played reasonably well and have only been improving. UNC isn’t guaranteed a single more 1-A win this year (though Duke looks relatively safe).
Soapbox Moment
Since I didn’t do one in my review of last weekend (the usual time), I thought I’d put one together now. This time, I’d like to talk about the ACC. No, not how badly they’ve struggled so far this year, but something else entirely: their divisional setup. To me, it just seems silly how they’ve set up teams. For instance, Boston College ought to be in a division with as many relatively northern teams (i.e. Maryland, UVA and VT) as possible. Instead, they’re only in with Maryland, which adds to the travel burden of everybody.
In addition, “whatever” games such as Virginia Tech – UNC, BC – Wake, and Miami – Duke are division “rivalries”, but Virginia – Maryland, UNC – NC State, Duke – Wake, and Clemson – Georgia Tech aren’t.
Of course, the structure of the league doesn’t make it easy to set up divisions. There are two Florida teams, four North Carolina teams, three (roughly) DC area teams, one Boston team, and two others between North Carolina and Florida. Putting together a two-division format that would make everyone happy is virtually impossible, given where everyone is (although it certainly wouldn’t be tough to make one at least a little better than the current travesty).
That’s why I suggest scrapping the two-division format and instead going with three divisions. One “North”: BC, UVA, VT and Maryland, one “South”: FSU, Miami, Clemson and Georgia Tech, and one “Tobacco Road” or “Carolina”: Duke, UNC, NC State, and Wake. Sounds crazy, right? Such a format seems inherently difficult to manage, and it certainly appears to unfairly favor certain teams over others.
However, it turns out that it works out a lot better than you’d think at first. Creating a championship game would simply be a matter of matching up the two division winners with the best conference record. It sounds awkward, but it would actually work out pretty well.
Moreover, such a system would turn out to be more fair, not less fair, than the current one. The obvious objection is that the South teams would have the toughest road, and the Carolina teams would have the easiest path. However, because the divisions are so small, it wouldn’t turn out to be a very big difference, as long as schedules were set up correctly. Thanks to having five non-division games against eight non-division foes, every team would play every other team at least once in each two-year period.
Compare that to the current system, using the non-division games for Wake Forest and Maryland as examples. In 2005, Maryland played Virginia, Virginia Tech and UNC. In 2006, they played Georgia Tech, Virginia and Miami. Wake, on the other hand, got Duke, Georgia Tech and Miami in 2005, and Duke, UNC, and Virginia Tech this year. That’s an appreciably tougher two-year run for the Terps, no matter how you slice it.
Now compare that to, say, what Georgia Tech and NC State would face under my system. Over a two-year period, they’d each get one game against everyone, and (possibly) play the following teams twice:
GT: FSU, Miami, Clemson (division); BC (one from the North), and UNC (one from Carolina)
NC St: Duke, Wake, UNC (division); Clemson (one from the South; more likely since they have a historic relationship), and Maryland (one from the North)
Is there a difference? Obviously. But it’s not a huge difference, and if you cut it down to one season it really doesn’t become a significant one. Essentially, the extra North game is random so we can ignore it, which means that every year NC State would get an extra game against Duke or Wake while Georgia Tech gets one more against FSU or Miami. That’s it.
Moreover, it would be easy to institute a tie-breaker that would take this into account. After overall ACC record, the next tiebreaker would be head to head, and the next one would be how well each division fared in inter-division play. Let’s look at an example. Say that the Carolina Division was lousy one year, but NC State won it with a 6-2 ACC record, Miami won the South with a 7-1 record, and Virginia Tech won the North at 6-2, and NC State and Virginia Tech hadn’t played each other. Miami would automatically be in with the best record, and the tiebreaker would boil down to which division was the best. And since (in this example) the Carolina teams combined for the worst ACC record, NC State would get bounced, which would be their fair penalty for having an easier run of it.
Does this make sense? I certainly think so. But there’s one more tangible benefit that such a system would provide: a high-level bowl game in DC. Right now, the Gator Bowl takes the 2nd best ACC team, but in this system the Gator would get the South winner whenever they didn’t win the league, and the DC bowl would get the North whenever they didn’t win (the Carolina winner could bounce between those two, or those bowls could have a choice; either way could work). That would mean that there would be a major bowl in DC, which can only be a good thing for college football and its interests (especially the ACC). Moreover, since the North Division winner would often end up there, it would be easy to develop a strong local interest, as three of the teams from the North Division are relatively close by.
Now, I know that this whole idea seems a bit counter-intuitive (plus the explanation was a bit longer than I intended it to be), but I believe that the more you think about it, the more the idea will grow on you. Why? Because it makes sense.
Questions, comments or suggestions? Email me at cfn_ms@hotmail.com