AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

I repeat: AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!


That image of The OBC is now burned into my retinas right next to the horrifying image of the old lady from "There's Something About Mary." This could only be worse if Charlie Weis were involved; thank God he's in Kansas and not somewhere hot.

North Carolina gets the Ohio State treatment

This happened and is kinda newsworthy (insert fist-shaking image here regarding my workload yesterday):

The NCAA has placed North Carolina's football program on three years' probation and banned it from the 2012 postseason, the governing body announced Monday.

The school already had imposed several penalties, including vacating all 16 wins for 2008 and 2009, reducing nine scholarships over the next three academic years and putting the program on two years of probation.

But the NCAA didn't stop at UNC's self-imposed penalties, finding that the school was responsible for violations including academic fraud, impermissible agent benefits, participation by ineligible players and a failure to monitor the football program.

Insert standard post-verdict complaint here:

"We are very disappointed in the committee's findings and we disagree," Blake's attorney, William Beaver, said. "I'm disappointed in any process where the accuser is also the investigator, prosecutor and judge and jury. It's not reasonable."

Meh. It is what it is. Also, please move "said" to immediately after the first part of the quote kthx. #analcopyeditor

So ... vacated wins, three years of moderate scholarship reductions (three per year) and a one-year postseason ban. Sounds moderately familiar, yes? Those are almost the exact same penalties (in terms of both category and volume) Ohio State got smacked with in December.

I find that interesting for a number of reasons, foremost of which is that Jim Tressel was documented as having covered up violations he had direct knowledge of whereas Butch Davis was never named or implicated in the whole John Blake thing; that apparently wasn't a consideration for the NCAA. Also of note in Ohio State's case: the dealer-car fuzziness, the Sugar Bowl debacle and the general "lol NCAA" attitude deployed by Gene Smith throughout the entire process. Maybe UNC's academic-fraud thing was considered roughly equivalent? I dunno. Tressel and Blake did get similar show-cause penalties, though, and at a zoomed-out level, the shenanigans were similar: craploads of impermissible benefits, a coach (or assistant coach) indirectly involved in said benefits and a general philosophy of "it's all good." I think it's safe to say that the NCAA has established a punishment baseline for that scenario.

The damage-assessment difference is this: Ohio State replaced Jim Tressel with Urban Meyer, who might be a step down by default (can't do any better against Michigan unless he literally never loses) but could theoretically be just as good or even better (argh). North Carolina went from "becoming one of the three best programs in the ACC with arguably the best coach" to ... ummm ... something slightly less than that with Butch Davis not around. Larry Fedora was a fine hire but probably isn't Butch Davis. There are reasons North Carolina has had only a handful of good seasons in the past bazillion years, and losing the guy who was succeeding and building something that defied all that history represents a penalty that can't really be quantified.

I find it unlikely that a one-year bowl ban is gonna have any real effect in UNC's recruiting given that this came out after Signing Day; anybody who commits going forward won't even be on campus until after the bowl ban has run its course. There's also minimal damage done by losing three scholarships a year, although depth will take a slight hit in about 2014-16, making Fedora's job a little tougher. At the end of the day, it's all about Davis and the loss of the momentum (or "cachet" or whatever you wanna call it) the program had built over the previous three years. When people write about the "hard lessons" learned from all this, they're really talking about one lesson that's useless now: Don't hire John Blake. Doing so cost Butch Davis a lot.

The look-on-the-bright-side angle is this: Even with the NCAA stuff, Fedora is still starting from a better spot than Davis, who took over a disaster of a program that John Bunting "led" to one winning season in six years. And with the on-field product being pretty much irrelevant this year, Fedora's got a year to put things in place and start establishing whatever it is he wants to do, with the only expectation being that UNC looks decent enough to keep recruiting at something resembling the last guy's level (I don't think Davis ever got enough credit for the absurd amount of NFL-caliber talent on that roster considering, you know, it's North Carolina and not Florida State). That's doable, as is developing that talent sufficiently to keep UNC in the "regular bowl team and occasional division contender" category in the not-that-great ACC. Actually doing those things is another matter, obviously.

Davis actually did those things, which is why (barring Fedora turning into the East Coast version of Mike Leach) his possibly necessary firing was far more meaningful than the handful of lost scholarships or the bowl ban for what'll probably be a 7-5 team or the essentially meaningless vacated wins. I say "possibly necessary" only because I think the school thought it was necessary from a PR standpoint even though Davis was not penalized at all by the NCAA and was not named or referenced in any way in the allegations. Keeping him would have been justifiable from a legal standpoint and almost certainly beneficial from a football standpoint, but it didn't happen because of Yahoo's power and the academia brow-furrowing that I'm sure carries more weight at UNC than it does at Ohio State.

I'm unsure what I'd do in the same situation but won't spend much time worrying about it since it doesn't matter at all. What matters: The program took a significant hit from this whole debacle despite the NCAA stuff turning out to be relatively benign, but because the NCAA stuff turned out to be relatively benign, the exact significance of that hit is up to Larry Fedora.

. . . . .

Postscript thought on NCAA shenanigans and my preference to write about football rather than people doing stupid things:


That is all.

Catching up wears a hilariously extravagant ring

WOO TEMPLE! Yes. Temple.

NEW YORK -- Nearly a decade after Temple's moribund football program was pushed out of the Big East, the revitalized Owls are rejoining the conference -- and bringing along their potent men's basketball team.

Temple football played in the Mid-American Conference last season, while all other programs, including men's basketball, are in the Atlantic 10. The Owls will pay an exit fee of $6 million to the MAC and $1 million to the A-10, with the Big East providing financial assistance in the form of future revenue distributions.

Great googly moogly: The Big East is dishing out an unknown amount of future revenue entirely to get Temple's 2012 football team. Mind-bottling. To repeat what I said roughly a week ago, I can't believe we're talking about a nominal BCS conference buying Temple, especially when that same sort of kickback could've bought Boise State for 2012 and eliminated the need for Temple as anything other than long-term insurance against defections (thus no buyout).

Anyway, the Big East will now include the following teams next season: Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple and USF. Gack.

Bonus amusing excerpt:

Temple was a Big East member in football only from 1991 to 2004 but was forced out because the program was one of the worst in major college football. The Owls failed to meet minimum requirements for membership, most notably in attendance, facilities and fielding a competitive team.

What else is there? Al Golden should really be getting a cut of that $7 million.

The legend of Dillon Baxter: Ah, Dillon Baxter. It's so unfortunate that playing college football requires following general college-student guidelines:

Troubled running back Dillon Baxter has been dismissed from San Diego State University, according to a report.

The San Diego Union-Tribune reported Wednesday that the former USC tailback was kicked off the team, quoting Aztecs coach Rocky Long as saying he was "no longer part of the program" for "various reasons."

He had been suspended from spring practice last week but was still supposed to be a part of the team after sitting out the 2012 season per NCAA transfer guidelines. But Baxter will not be back with SDSU at any point, according to the report.

Baxter was an uber recruit a couple years ago thanks to a head-asploding highlight video and was all the rage last spring as 2011's version of The Next Reggie Bush. He then got 12 touches in four games at USC before various shenanigans got him suspended by for the rest of the year. Details:

While at USC, the ex-San Diego prep star ran into a number of off-field problems, including his acceptance of a golf-cart ride by an NFL agent and a suspension for misconduct during fall camp. He also frequently complained about his lack of playing time before not making the trip to Notre Dame last October and subsequently leaving the team the following week.

One thing Baxter always did do was apologize for his actions and remark that he was a changed man, calling himself a "knucklehead" and mentioning multiple times that he had learned from his mistakes -- only to commit the same sort of mistakes shortly afterward.

Motion for an official nickname of "Knucklehead" passes. Obligatory video:


THEMANPUNTEDBAXTER!!!

I'm not sure Bill O'Brien understands the rules: This is a very odd response from Bill O'Brien in a relatively standard Q&A with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (not sure why the AJC is interviewing Penn State's coach, but whatever);

Q: Your opinion of over-signing?

A: “We’re in the process of evaluating our roster right now. We’re trying to get a real hold on what exactly our needs are for next year. And then, at that point, we’ll make a decision on whether we’ll do what you’re talking about. There’s some definite advantages in doing that. Right now, we haven’t made a decision on whether we’re headed in that direction.”

Ummm .. yeah. The Big Ten has a limit of 25 enrollees per recruiting year; you can sign up to 28, but that only applies if three or more players enroll early and therefore can be backdated to the previous year's class (assuming that one had 22 players or fewer). You can't just cut a bunch of guys you don't like and then replace them with a ginormous recruiting class unless you're Nick Saban. I'm pretty sure he should know that given that coaches have to pass an NCAA recruiting test when they get hired.

At least the actual recruiting part doesn't seem to be a problem: Penn State already has commitments from three relatively big-time 2013 dudes, including four-star QB Christian Hackenberg, and is almost definitely gonna get a commitment from in-state five-star tight end Adam Breneman when he announces on Friday.

This is surprising inasmuch as I thought Penn State was gonna be a de facto leper for about the next five years; apparently not. The actuality of the situation is obviously good news for everybody who wants the Big Ten Whatever Division to have the talent distributed among more than one school, which is basically everybody outside the state of Ohio. Whether that talent actually results in a good team remains to be seen and depends largely on the complete unknown that is O'Brien's development ability. We'll know in about five years.

She probably kicks like a girl: So ... this LSU women's soccer goalie is trying out for the football team. Standard intro:

Tuesday was the first day of LSU walk-on tryouts, and the most famous female athlete in Baton Rouge — a girl-next-door beauty and homecoming queen whose face has appeared on billboards and recruiting posters — put on a helmet and attempted numerous field goals and kickoffs.

Surprisingly, this is not your standard girl-trying-out-for-football story. This not-so-little lady apparently has a huge leg -- she reportedly hit a not-teed-up 51-yard field goal last year and is getting kickoffs to or near the goal line -- and has overcome some presumably awful depression after her LSU-fan father committed suicide a couple years ago in the face of some serious IRS charges.

The story's worth a read regardless of whether or not she makes the team, which would be swell if it didn't mean we'd all be forced to suffer through the same feel-good feature repeated every week by every media outlet in existence.

Insert Tate Forcier joke here: This is actually from almost two months ago but (a) went totally unnoticed when it happened and (b) became relevant again today for reasons I will explain momentarily:

Just confirmed that Tate Forcier is done at San Jose State. The former Michigan starter has withdrawn from school, according to a source close to the situation.

I spoke with Forcier’s father, Michael, who said there were a lot of issues, including family financial concerns (Forcier was not on scholarship).

“He’s not going to continue. There’s too much pressure, too much stress. ...

“We have a family business (a bus and limousine service). It hasn’t been a good year, like for a lot of people. Tate’s helping us out right now, in fact. ...

“It wasn’t a clean thing, like he didn’t like school. He loves football and he loves San JoseState. He has a lot going on in his life and wants to take time and find it."

Those explanations are all pretty odd and vague and therefore appropriate since "odd" and "vague" accurately describe everything surrounding Tate Forcier's personal life. It seems safe to assume that he's done with college football.

The sad thing is that I wouldn't have even known about this if not for Joe Schad's tweet Thursday morning:

Former UM QB Tate Forcier says he’s training w Jeff Garcia in San Diego; there are a few CFL teams interested.

There are supposedly a few CFL teams interested. Hard to believe it's only been two and a half years since this:


Good times.

Kyle Padron headed to Eastern Washington: What the headline says. Padron threw for a bajillion yards (roughly) with 31 touchdowns and 14 picks for SMU in 2010, then flamed out spectacularly in the season opener last year with two picks in four passes. That was basically the end of his season and SMU career; J.J. McDermott took his starting job and won five straight games, and while McDermott's out of eligibility, Garrett Gilbert is in the process of transferring from Texas and should be eligible to play immediately due to the grad-school loophole. Sticking at SMU would give Padron pretty limited senior-year options (beat out Gilbert or eat bench, essentially).

FYI, Eastern Washington has a pretty good FCS program that won a national championship in 2010 thanks mostly to (coincidence alert) Bo Levi Mitchell, who transferred from SMU before Padron took over and threw for about 400 yards a game. Padron would probably be satisfied with a similar fate.

Pat Fitzgerald is hilarious: No other coach could possibly use this word combination and be taken seriously (this is a comment regarding bowl eligibility, obviously):

"I'm not for five-win teams even being able to receive a waiver. That's tough noogies. If you have a losing record, you are out. A .500 record should be the benchmark."

Yessssssss. Hat tip to MGoBlog.

What if they like porridge? This is ... ummm ... different:

The seriousness of new Illinois coach Tim Beckman's disciplinary methods were quickly introduced when porridge was set in front of many players.

Those who followed the rules, arriving at classes 10 minutes early and never missing a rep during winter workouts, were treated to steak and eggs at the "All-In Banquet." Those who missed a beat were treated to an Oliver Twist breakfast.

Twenty-one players earned the steak and eggs. Beckman, who clearly wants to set a tone of accountability in his first season, ate at the porridge table after missing a workout to speak at an alumni event.

Outstanding. Pizza would be a better college-kid motivator (at least from my experiences) but probably lacks the nutritional qualities of steak and eggs. I have no idea what porridge tastes like; I assume it's not good.

Please explain this ring: This has no relevance to anything current but was posted on some random website I stumbled across and needs to be shared:

That's Florida tight end Trey Burton's ring from the Gator Bowl. The Gator Bowl. The freakin' Gator Bowl. I have nothing else to add here.

Tucson is lacking entertainment alternatives

Hoo boy, this sounds not good (beware extended blockquote):

Tucson Police Department officers arrested four UA football players after a fight at the home of five UA students early Friday morning.

According to police reports, sophomore cornerback Jourdon Grandon, sophomore offensive tackle Fabbians Ebbele and sophomore offensive lineman Eric Bender were arrested on charges of criminal trespassing in the first degree and assault, and sophomore safety Jared Tevis was arrested on trespassing charges. ...

According to police records, residents asked Tevis and the other players to leave because they were not invited. One of the men responded by shoving one of the women backwards. The man was later identified as former safety Joshua Robbins. After being shoved, the resident slapped Robbins, who then proceeded to punch her in the face — starting a brawl between the football players and members of the party.

The players left after the brawl, but before leaving said, “We will be back with our homies.” A short time later, the players returned “in a group of between 10 and 30,” and a man later identified as sophomore offensive tackle Fabbians Ebbele forcibly entered the home and “began punching everybody he could reach,” according to the report, including the resident who was initially assaulted and her brother.

People at the party told officers the UA players entered the home and began assaulting male members of the party while several women attempted to stop another fight from happening. One woman was pushed up against the wall by Robbins. Robbins continued to push other female guests and residents.

Members of the party identified Grandon after he “punched a female guest in her face with a closed fist and began punching other females in the face.” Tevis was also present during the altercation, but none of the victims observed him assaulting anyone.

Hilarious malfeasance bolded for emphasis. Visual interpretation:


Fat Tony = Fabbiens Ebbele. Creepy ninja in white suit = Jared Tevis. Jourdon Grandon lacks an appropriate comparison other than possibly Sean Connery circa 1987:


Insert kitchen joke here.

A little non-snark perspective: Ebbele was the starting left tackle last year, Grandon was a part-time starter headed for a full-time job at corner, Tevis was listed as a backup at safety and Bender was an unknown quantity. I use the past tense for those guys because ... I mean ... obviously. I'll be amazed if Ebbele and Grandon are still on the roster come fall camp unless the official version of the story changes dramatically; their losses (especially Ebbele's) wouldn't be insignificant.

On a directly related note, karma hates Rich Rodriguez. For whatever reason, hiring him portends immediate awfulness that is not at all his fault but is definitely going to happen. I can only assume that every goldfish he's ever owned died after 12 hours and he has that one really irritating canker sore that never totally goes away. Yeesh.

The annual thing where I embarrass myself

I just made the stunning realization that it's March (!), which is fantastic for many reasons but mostly because it means two entire months have been removed from the awful chasm that exists between the end of one football season and the beginning of the next (also known as spring football). The time: It's passing. Hooray for that.

So yeah ... spring football. It starts in like a week. That means many glorious things but also means I should probably go back and do that thing where I look at last year's predictions and how perfectly right/horrifically wrong they were. This will undoubtedly be humiliating but must be done for the sake of establishing just how little attention should be paid to everything I say/write/publish/tweet/whatever.

I did this two years ago and came out at the Lou Holtz end of the accuracy spectrum; I got 4 1/2 points out of 13. Just as a refresher, accurate predictions get one point, sort-of-correct predictions get a half-point and crappy predictions get none. It's not that complicated. It also doesn't seem that difficult but apparently is since going back and reading large chunks of the stuff I wrote in the preseason induces the following reaction:

My disbelief speaks Spanish. I can't explain it.

Anyway ... show? Show.

1. Alabama will win it all. Oklahoma's the safe pick and will probably go undefeated, but I'm going with Bama on the assumption that the quarterback play will be decent, Trent Richardson will be borderline dominant and the defense will reach or exceed its typical level of awesomeness (just look at the depth chart and then think about who the coach is).

Schwing. I deserve some freakin' bonus points for that ridiculousness but will settle for the one point I'm allotted based on the totally arbitrary scoring system I set up.

2. Landry Jones will win the Heisman. I was hinting at this the other day in my post about the modern-day Heisman criteria and the near-exclusive emphasis on guys whose teams end up in the national title game. Landry Jones will put up gigantic numbers as the star quarterback for a team that's starting at No. 1 and will probably stay there all season (or at least until the title game); he's gotta be the favorite. Andrew Luck might be the awesomest quarterback since Peyton Manning or whoever, but I think he's gonna be victimized (for lack of a better word) by the same thought process Manning was back in '97: He's so hyped and so highly regarded that it's gonna be hard to impress/excite people. I mean, it's hard to envision his numbers being any better than they were last year, when he barely edged out LaMichael James to finish second after Stanford went 11-1.

Not so much. I was right about Andrew Luck not winning but was totally wrong about Landry Jones and would've put about 60 guys ahead of RGIII on a hypothetical preseason ballot. Zero points.

3. Texas will bounce back massively. To be specific, Texas will go 9-3. ... Garrett Gilbert will be better, the defense will still be good and the talent will still match up with anybody in the country. With Nebraska off the schedule and only three legitimately good teams on it, I'm seeing a significant turnaround and a top-tier-ish bowl game.

Ehhh ... no. Texas went 7-5 in the regular season, which was at least in part due to Garrett Gilbert being so bad that he got benched and ended up transferring, and any bowl with one mediocre 7-5 team playing another mediocre 7-5 team does not qualify as "top-tier-ish." Zero points.

4. Auburn will be OK. Gotta put my proverbial money where my mouth is: I'll say Auburn finishes 7-5 and somewhere near the bottom of the polls. I just can't envision a nuclear implosion at the level of 5-7, which is what the sports books are saying. Yeah, the schedule is really hard, but all that stuff I wrote about Gus Malzahn and Michael Dyer and Ted Roof has to mean something ... right?

Indeed: Auburn finished exactly 7-5 despite playing a laughably difficult schedule and getting killed by most of the legitimately good teams on it. WOO GIMME A POINT PLZKTHX. Side note: All three of the guys mentioned above are now gone, which is kinda crazy.

5. Michigan will finish 8-4. I came to this highly scientific conclusion by averaging out my worst-case scenario (6-6) and my best-case scenario (10-2). The problem is that anything in that range is entirely possible, because nobody has any idea exactly how much the defense will improve under hypothetical savior Greg Mattison and how much the offense will drop off now that Rich Rodriguez is analyzing stuff on CBS rather than calling plays. My guesses: "quite a bit" and "some but not a lot." ... I'm gonna write a little more on Michigan on Friday, but since it's not Friday and this is the spot for predictions, I'm going with 8-4.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL WWWWHHHHEEEEEEEEE!!! BTW, I'm giving myself half a point for the best-case-scenario bit and the stuff about the offense and the defense and basically being right about everything other than the record. I'm satisfied with that trade.

6. Arizona State will go 9-3 and play in the Pac-12 title game. In short, ASU is the best of a mediocre crop in the Pac-12 South. I'm tentatively optimistic about Brock Osweiler and a loaded group of receivers ... the offense will be somewhere between good and excellent. The defense should be fine, but it's depressing to think about how much better it could be with Lawrence Guy (NFL draft), Omar Bolden (torn ACL) and Brandon Magee (torn Achilles). Guh. Anyway, with Arizona having no O-line and just as many injuries on defense, Utah losing a bunch of key pieces on both sides of the ball and UCLA and Colorado being ... umm ... UCLA and Colorado, the division title is there for the taking. I'm calling nine wins, a second loss to Oregon in the Pac-12 championship game and a contract extension for Dennis Erickson (please note that my predictions do not necessarily represent what I think would be best for the program).

Ummm ... no. I was actually right about pretty much everything in the non-bolded portion (especially the "division title is there for the taking" part) but had no idea ASU planned to end its season in October, which made that 9-3 prediction look pretty awful. I don't think I can claim any points for this one.

7. Notre Dame will finish 10-2 and play in a BCS game. Insert Lou Holtz/Beano Cook senility reference here. I've been sold for a long time on Brian Kelly, and I think this is the year he puts it all together at Notre Dame. If Dayne Crist stays healthy and Michael Floyd stays sober, they should both put up ridiculous numbers as the offense takes the Brian Kelly Leap to Dominance. The defense will be slightly improved to the point of being above average, and that should be more than sufficient given the expected offensive awesomeness. Caveat: The first four games are tough (South Florida, under the lights at Michigan, Michigan State and at Pitt). But if ND somehow gets through that stretch 4-0 or even 3-1, a BCS game is a virtual lock. Seriously -- just try to find two losses in the back half of the schedule.

This site shall heretofore be known as Forever Thaturday.

8. Oregon will go 11-1 and win the Pac-12. I'm of the opinion that Oregon is head and shoulders above the rest of the conference, so this isn't exactly a huge leap of faith. To make things a little more interesting, I'll throw this out there: Oregon's one loss won't be to Stanford or LSU. Neither of those teams will be able to keep up. And I've already ruled out ASU, so I'm talking about a legitimate upset, like maybe USC or Oregon State or Arizona (think about how close UA was to winning in Tucson two years ago). The offense will still be really good overall, but consistency will be a little harder to come by this year with a mostly overhauled O-line, and one bad game (like last year's ugly one against Cal) will be the difference between perfection and the Rose Bowl.

Oregon finished 10-2, lost to USC, beat Stanford, won the Pac-12 and played in the Rose Bowl. In other words, I was wrong about the LSU game and right about literally everything else, which is good enough for a point in my book (and my book is the only once that matters since I'm doing the scoring).

9. Wisconsin will win the Big Ten. It's basically a Wisconsin-Nebraska battle unless Ohio State comes together in remarkable fashion or Brady Hoke continues to poop gold at Michigan, and with an absolute juggernaut of a running game and possibly the best quarterback in the conference (must be nice to lose a good senior starter and somehow get better at the position), I gotta go with Wisconsin. ... Running the table isn't out of the question, but there are enough pretty good teams in the Big Ten that I don't see anybody getting through unscathed.

Point me, please.

10. Ohio State will be closer to typical Ohio State than apocalyptic Ohio State. After years of Tresselball and excruciating (for me) wins over Michigan that all seem the same when zoomed out, it's hard to imagine/remember anything different. It is possible that Ohio State will be, like, not good this year: There are only four starters back from last year's defense, the quarterback spot is a complete mystery, the offensive line has underachieved for the past several years and the two biggest offensive weapons are both sitting out the first half of the season. But of those first five games, only two -- at Miami and home for Michigan State -- are even remotely losable, and the rest of the schedule is a bunch of crap along with a road game at Nebraska, a home game against Wisconsin and The Game in Ann Arbor. In other words, 7-5 seems like the absolute worst-case scenario, and 10 wins is probably more likely than seven. My prediction: 9-3. If that somehow includes a loss to Michigan, the celebration at my house will last for months.

I begrudgingly accept zero points. Also: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

11. Miami will be about as mediocre as last season's Miami. I just said this like a day and a half ago, but I'll repeat it here anyway: Miami will be decent. The suspensions are all minor enough that by Week 5 -- when 2-2 is basically the worst-case scenario -- everyone will be available, and the ACC is as mediocre as ever beyond Florida State and Virginia Tech. Miami just needs four wins against the gooey middle of the conference to lock up a spot in a bowl game (any bowl game), which seems totally doable and would be a fine start for Al Golden. That would also slightly delay the debate about whether Miami will actually have a program in 2012 and beyond.

Miami finished 6-6 (and turned down a bowl invite) a year after going 6-6. I'm pretty sure that qualifies as "decent" and am positive it qualifies as "about as mediocre as last season's Miami." One point.

12. Florida State will win the ACC but won't be quite ready for the national title: As mentioned above, the ACC is as uninspiring as ever and should be a cakewalk for Florida State and Virginia Tech in their respective divisions. It's that game against Oklahoma on September 17 (and possibly a trip to Florida in November) that makes things dicey. I love FSU's defense this year, but the offense is a massive question mark; nobody really knows what E.J. Manuel is gonna bring to the table, and none of the skill-position guys jump out. It's hard to run the table without some bread-and-butter options on offense; the only comparable team to win a title in recent history was 2007 LSU, and that required a crazy, not-repeatable string of events that saw a two-loss team get into the national title game. The guess here is that Florida State loses to Oklahoma but then rolls through the ACC, beats Va. Tech in the conference championship game and makes the short trip to the Orange Bowl at 12-1.

Settle down, me. Florida State was actually really close to going 11-1 (there were three devastating ACC losses by a combined 11 points) but instead finished 8-4, which is much closer to "meh" than "rolls through the ACC." Zero points.

13. Arkansas will be this year's (relative) disappointment. Three new starters on the offensive line (including both tackles), a new interior D-line, a quarterback who has basically played one career game and a star running back who's out for the season. According to brilliant people like Rick Reilly, that formula equals national championship. According to me, that formula equals ... ummm ... something well short of a national championship. There are enough tough games (at Alabama, against Texas A&M in Arlington, Auburn and South Carolina at home, at LSU) that I just can't see anything better than 9-3. The official prediction: 8-4 and a mediocre bowl game.

Not so much; Arkansas went 11-2, finished fifth and would've played in a BCS game if not for the two-team-per-conference deal. I'm clearly no Rick Reilly.

14. Boise State will run the table again. As is the norm for Boise, the first game is the toughest one: If they can get past a good-on-paper Georgia team in Atlanta on Saturday, chalk up another trip to the Fiesta Bowl and an honorary seat in New York for Kellen Moore. The Mountain West is a little tougher than the WAC, but it won't matter this year, especially with TCU in somewhat of a rebuilding mode and having to play on the smurf turf on November 12.

Derp. Stupid TCU.

15. Some absolutely ridiculous and sure-to-be-wrong bowl guesses: I have no idea why I'm doing this, but here goes: Wisconsin will play Oregon in the Rose Bowl, Boise State will play Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl, Florida State will play Georgia in the Sugar Bowl, West Virginia will play Nebraska in the Orange Bowl and Alabama will play (and beat) Oklahoma in the BCS championship game. And then I will cry because it will be eight months until football again.

I absolutely nailed the Rose Bowl and got half of both the Orange Bowl and the championship game; the others weren't even close, although I'm still not sure why Boise didn't get picked for an at-large spot ahead of Virginia Tech. Anyway, this seems like an appropriate spot for a half-point distribution.

So ... the tally goes as follows: 1, 0, 0, 1, 0.5, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0.5. According to the calculator-esque functionality of my brain, that's an amazing six points out of a possible 15, which ... ummm ... I'd rather not think about it as a percentage other than to point out that it's a slight improvement from the patheticness I produced two years ago. So that's nice. There was also the "Alabama will win it all" thing that I'll definitely bring up too often for the next several years.

To reiterate:

... interpret that success/crappiness rate as you will. If it makes you feel any better, I still have complete confidence that what you read here is more insightful and accurate than what you'll get from Lou Holtz and Mark May, which is basically the equivalent of saying "this hamburger isn't filet mignon but is better than dog crap."

That's pretty much my site motto. Gotta set the bar high.

Todd Graham doesn't look uncomfortable at all

TODD GRAHAM IS HIGH-OCTANE EVERYTHING. HIGH-OCTANE OFFENSE. HIGH-OCTANE WATCHING. HIGH-OCTANE JUMPING. HIGH-OCTANE DRAWLING. HIGH-OCTANE NECK REMOVAL. HIGH-OCTANE SALESMAN-ING.

Yes, salesman-ing. There is no reason other than salesman-ing to invest any amount of time and/or effort in an ASU basketball game. Fact.

As for that shirt, Holly Anderson's fine-print suggestion ...

"Right now. I think."

... wins the internet. The jokes: They're so easy.

A recruiting-related tip of the cap

I have done absolutely nothing related to this year's recruiting classes and the Signing Day that came and went over a month ago. This is not because I have zero interest in recruiting; it's simply because there's simply so much going on that trying to follow it from a national perspective is pointless. It's not possible. I also have little desire to follow the whims of 17-year-olds.

What is definitely NOT the reason for my lack of coverage is the stupid misconception that permeates message boards everywhere that recruiting doesn't matter because of West Virginia and Boise State and (insert name of two-star guy who turned out awesome). The anecdotal arguments are everywhere and ignore the numerical evidence that is available if you'd like to put it together ... except somebody has already done that.

Given the depressing news of the week, it seems appropriate to point out that Dr. Saturday has been (was?) on about a four-year quest to explain to people that recruiting rankings actually do* matter. This quest started on Sunday Morning Quarterback with some relatively basic analysis and has been carried over to Yahoo with a lot more numbers that just back up the original numbers.

I'm gonna steal a couple charts here to establish a few things going forward. The first is a breakdown of All-Americans by star rankings along with their corresponding odds of becoming an All-American:

Explanation:

Maybe a raw ratio of 1 in 12 — or even 1 in 10, or whatever the "adjusted" number is after accounting for the early departures, injuries and academics that these numbers make no attempt to reflect — isn't all that impressive by itself. After all, that means far more elite recruits are falling short of their star-studded birthright than are reaching it. Across the board, failure and mediocrity are the norm, but if you think of a four or five-star player as a guy who is supposed to become an All-American — and a two or three-star guy as someone who is definitely not supposed to become an All-American — then yes, the rankings frequently miss.

On the other hand, if you consider the initial grade as a kind of investment — a projection of the how likely a player is of becoming an elite contributor compared to rest of the field — well, you'd put your money with the "experts" over the chances of finding the proverbial diamond in the rough every time.

Upshot: A five-star player is about 11 times more likely to become an All-American than a three-star player and 100 times (!) more likely to become an All-American than a two-star player. The digression isn't just linear but is exponential, which is amazing (lol nerd). Think about that and what it means from an odds standpoint: Talent evaluation is not a complete crapshoot and shouldn't be devalued just because Mike Hart and Kellen Moore turned out to be really good and Ryan Perriloux had no idea how to find his classes. The scouting dudes are pretty good when you zoom out.

The second relevant chart shows the not-quite-as-easy-to-calculate correlation between team recruiting rankings and wins:

Explanation:

... on the final count, the higher-ranked team according to the recruiting rankings won more than two-thirds of the time (68.7 percent of the time, to be exact), and every "class" as a whole had a winning record against every class ranked below it. The gap on the field also widened with the gap in the recruiting scores: At the extremes, "one-star" and "two-star" recruiting teams managed just five wins over "five-star" recruiters — four of them coming at the expense of Florida State and Texas — in 31 tries.

It's a simple equation: The better your recruiting rankings by the gurus, the better your chances of winning games, against all classes. Emphasis on the word "chances."

FYI, while the chart above is based solely on 2011 games and 2008-11 recruiting classes, the numbers have looked essentially the same every year since Dr. Saturday started doing this thing. That takes care of any questions about whether the 2008 and '09 classes should be weighed more heavily or whatever. The results are the same. I'm actually kinda surprised by the consistency here given that it'd seem like a cumulative collection of recruiting rankings wouldn't necessarily give you an accurate picture of a team and its overall quality, but the numbers are what they are.

So yeah ... there is a direct, almost-linear correlation between recruiting rankings and both individual awesomeness and team wins. That is not a fluke. These charts/numbers will be cited by me in every argument about recruiting and how the rankings don't matter and blah blah blah. They are not 100 percent accurate but represent a pretty good level of expectation and are only getting better due to more scouts and more camps and more coverage and whatnot.

The one alleged caveat that will always get brought up and therefore should be discussed here: the self-fulfilling-prophecy thing. It's not uncommon for a lower-profile guy who commits to Alabama/USC/Michigan/Ohio State/whoever to get a "he must be better than we thought" rankings bump, thus exacerbating the numerical gap between the best schools and everybody else. But if that were truly a significant factor (and not a negligible one affecting only a couple under-the-radar guys a year), it would mean Alabama/USC/Michigan/Ohio State/whoever would be getting a whole bunch of not-that-great players who were rated highly only because of their destination, and that can't possibly be accurate given the continued and consistent advantage in wins and number of all-whatever players for those programs (see the charts). One last blockquote:

... it’s an argument that’s wrong on its face to the point of absurdity: it suggests that successful programs just are successful, regardless of the players they recruit.

If the gurus followed the larger schools’ assessments to a fault, if USC was being ranked at the top of the lists simply because it was USC, even if it was signing the same players as UCLA, the Trojans would obviously be closer to UCLA’s results. Substitute "USC" and "UCLA" in that sentence for an overwhelming majority of the possible comparisons between teams who are not close to one another in the rankings.

Word. The rankings-bump argument doesn't make any sense when you think about the actual results. And I have yet to see any data-inclusive response that presents a coherent counterargument to any of this stuff, which is probably because the data ... like ... yeah. There are limited interpretations.

BTW, I realize this would have been way more timely around Signing Day, but I felt compelled to grab some of this info in response to the recruiting-related pieces I've seen in the last month, all of which included a comments section filled with inane crap that must be refuted. Expect this post again in about 11 months; with the Doc gone, somebody's gotta carry the torch of logic.

*They don't matter as much as coaching. There's obviously a reason Florida State/Miami/whoever massively underachieved while Boise State and West Virginia were winning BCS games; just look at those teams' coaches. That said, accumulating talent is still important in the big picture. Exceptions, rule, etc.