There has been a lot of griping about last night's U-Conn/Butler clank-fest. Butler managed to stay in the game for a good 30-35 minutes while shooting 18% from the field. But was it the worst Championship game ever?
I don't think so - Although it wasn't aesthetically pleasing, I'll take a close game over a blowout every time.
Here are a ten(+) Championship games that I would say were much worse:
2009 NCAA Men's Basketball - UNC 89 - MSU 72 (final score not as indicative of how bad it was)
1990 NCAA Men's Basketball - UNLV 103 - Duke 73
Super Bowl XXII - Redskins 42 Broncos 10
SB XXIV - 49ers 55 - Broncos 10
SB XXVII - Cowboys 52 - Bills 17
SB XXIX - 49ers 49 - Chargers 26
2001 Orange Bowl (BCS) - Oklahoma 13 - Florida St 2
2008 BCS - Florida 41 - OSU 14
2005 Orange Bowl (BCS) USC 55 - Oklahoma 19
All three Bowl Alliance Championship games (1996-1998) Nebraska 62 - Florida 24; Florida 52 -FSU 20; Nebraska 42 - Tennessee 17
People on twitter were actually suggesting that a BCS like Kansas - OSU game would have been better. U-Conn won 11 straight games (over 10 tournament teams) to win the championship. Butler had won 14 straight before losing last night.
These were very good teams that had a bad night. Lets not scrap the system that game us a 41 point TOTAL difference between the champs and runners-up in the decade of the 1980s
Showing posts with label ncaa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ncaa. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Monday, April 4, 2011
Go Bulldogs!
One year ago today, the match-up was set for the NCAA basketball final. Perennial power Duke would be facing local underdog Butler. The expectation was an easy victory for Duke. Butler took them to the brink. Gordon Hayward's half-court heave rattled out securing Duke's 4th title.
Even with this close a match-up, had the question been asked which of these teams will be back in the final next year. I would have expected the answer to be Duke more than 9 out of 10 times.
And yet Butler is the team playing for the championship tonight. Hayward was their best player last year and is now in the NBA, but somehow, they made it back anyway.
I've heard callers on the local radio complaining that they prefer when the big names teams are playing rather than these small schools. I've heard national "experts" say the TV numbers will be down because no one cares about Butler. Strangely enough, Saturday's match-up were the most watched semi-finals since 2005. I would expect similar numbers tonight.
I think Butler's coach, Brad Stevens, has to be considered the top young coach in the game. I would think any school with an opening will be trying to convince him to leave Butler for greener (like $$$) pastures. I hope he stays.
UConn is facing punishment next season. Jim Calhoun will have to sit out 3 games next season for recruiting violations. Combining that with his rant a couple years back when asked about justifying how much he makes in this economic crisis, makes it easy to root for the under(Bull)dog.
Even with this close a match-up, had the question been asked which of these teams will be back in the final next year. I would have expected the answer to be Duke more than 9 out of 10 times.
And yet Butler is the team playing for the championship tonight. Hayward was their best player last year and is now in the NBA, but somehow, they made it back anyway.
I've heard callers on the local radio complaining that they prefer when the big names teams are playing rather than these small schools. I've heard national "experts" say the TV numbers will be down because no one cares about Butler. Strangely enough, Saturday's match-up were the most watched semi-finals since 2005. I would expect similar numbers tonight.
I think Butler's coach, Brad Stevens, has to be considered the top young coach in the game. I would think any school with an opening will be trying to convince him to leave Butler for greener (like $$$) pastures. I hope he stays.
UConn is facing punishment next season. Jim Calhoun will have to sit out 3 games next season for recruiting violations. Combining that with his rant a couple years back when asked about justifying how much he makes in this economic crisis, makes it easy to root for the under(Bull)dog.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Tressel
So much has already been said in regards to Jim Tressel that I can't really add too much, but what the heck...
I think this is definitely a case of the cover-up being worse than the crime. The players are suspended 5 games for their part in Tat-gate. I have some difficulty with people not being allowed to sell/trade things they own, but it is an obvious area where trouble can occur - "Here's $10,000 for that old sock..." But these are college kids, surrounded by people who want a piece of them and basking in their admiration.
Tressel is an adult with decades of coaching experience. He apparently lied to his boss, his bosses boss and the NCAA when the investigation finally came to light in December (8 months after he knew about it). His press conference statement seemed to have been co-written by Charlie Sheen.
When I first heard about this, I thought it was something that would not have a major implication on Tressel or OSU's future. But it has become apparent that is not the case.
I think this is definitely a case of the cover-up being worse than the crime. The players are suspended 5 games for their part in Tat-gate. I have some difficulty with people not being allowed to sell/trade things they own, but it is an obvious area where trouble can occur - "Here's $10,000 for that old sock..." But these are college kids, surrounded by people who want a piece of them and basking in their admiration.
Tressel is an adult with decades of coaching experience. He apparently lied to his boss, his bosses boss and the NCAA when the investigation finally came to light in December (8 months after he knew about it). His press conference statement seemed to have been co-written by Charlie Sheen.
When I first heard about this, I thought it was something that would not have a major implication on Tressel or OSU's future. But it has become apparent that is not the case.
- I think he will be lucky if he keeps his job. Of the coaches hit with bylaw 10.1 violations, only one kept their job.
- If Tressel isn't fired, his suspension should certainly be as long or more appropriately longer that the players involved.
- I don't see how OSU doesn't have to vacate wins from last season. (it likely wouldn't be forfeits, what does that do to my database?)
- They will be hit with probation, likely including a bowl ban - this would also keep them out of the first B1G championship game.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Michigan Basketball - better than expected
I'm pleasantly surprised by how well the Michigan Basketball team has done this year. John Beilein seems to generate the same kind of belief/hatred that RR did. The tone may be similar but the volume is quieter since it is Michigan Basketball not Michigan Football.
Breaking down the season into sections:
Off season - team lost two best players from a team that couldn't make the NIT - they'll be lucky to beat out Indiana/Iowa for 9-10th place
Pre-season trip to Europe - M finished like 1-4 or something like that. General tone was, this is evidence the team is not very good - although some signs that Tim Hardaway Jr. might be a decent player in a few years...
Non-Conference Season - somewhat surprising success - albeit against light competition - M went 10-3 out of conference (10-2 in the real "pre" conference season). With respectable losses to Syracuse and Kansas. The best victories would be against Oakland, Clemson and Harvard. Public reception is "Maybe this is an NIT team."
Early conference season - after 7 conference games, M is 1-6; their only victory against Penn St. with "poor" losses at Indiana and Northwestern overshadowing decent efforts against OSU, Purdue and Minnesota (and Kansas). There was a lot of "Beilein must go" calls into WTKA.
The season turned back to the positive with a surprising victory in East Lansing over MSU. M hadn't won there since the early 90s and MSU's mid-season collapse wasn't obvious at game time. This win lead off an 8 game stretch where M has gone 6-2, with close loss to OSU and a one-possession loss to Illinois, with 2 shots to win/tie the end. There has certainly been very little "Beilein has to go" talk on the radio. But I wouldn't say he has great support either. I think victories quiet the detractors, but don't win them over.
M has 3 games remaining before the B1G tournament. Wednesday they host Wisconsin, then go to Minnesota on Saturday before having the week off and hosting MSU to close out the season.
Michigan is still on the outside of the NCAA tournament. A win over Wisconsin would go a long way to helping their cause. Outside of that M would need to win the other two games an probably a couple tourney games to have much chance to make the Big Dance...
The team can be annoying to watch, they still have long stretches where they don't score. Am I the only one who thinks Darius Morris dribbles too much? They have almost no offensive rebounding. Zack Novak is still playing the 4 most of the time and taller teams just eat him up... I don't have a problem with "settling" for 3-point shots, as long as we have decent shooters. Douglass and Novak have struggled the past few games and need to get it turned around. This has been offset by the amazing couple of weeks Hardaway was had. He's really on a tear, he's set and reset his career scoring high a few times in the past week.
This is still a very flawed team, but I don't think that falls solely on the lap of Beilein, as much as M's football failures were RR's responsibility.
Last season was supposed to be a step forward after M finally made the Tournament in 08-09. The team fell apart, presumably because Manny Harris wasn't interested in Beilein's system. Whether this team makes the NCAA or settles for the NIT, Beilein can't afford M to fall back again after a second positive season.
Breaking down the season into sections:
Off season - team lost two best players from a team that couldn't make the NIT - they'll be lucky to beat out Indiana/Iowa for 9-10th place
Pre-season trip to Europe - M finished like 1-4 or something like that. General tone was, this is evidence the team is not very good - although some signs that Tim Hardaway Jr. might be a decent player in a few years...
Non-Conference Season - somewhat surprising success - albeit against light competition - M went 10-3 out of conference (10-2 in the real "pre" conference season). With respectable losses to Syracuse and Kansas. The best victories would be against Oakland, Clemson and Harvard. Public reception is "Maybe this is an NIT team."
Early conference season - after 7 conference games, M is 1-6; their only victory against Penn St. with "poor" losses at Indiana and Northwestern overshadowing decent efforts against OSU, Purdue and Minnesota (and Kansas). There was a lot of "Beilein must go" calls into WTKA.
The season turned back to the positive with a surprising victory in East Lansing over MSU. M hadn't won there since the early 90s and MSU's mid-season collapse wasn't obvious at game time. This win lead off an 8 game stretch where M has gone 6-2, with close loss to OSU and a one-possession loss to Illinois, with 2 shots to win/tie the end. There has certainly been very little "Beilein has to go" talk on the radio. But I wouldn't say he has great support either. I think victories quiet the detractors, but don't win them over.
M has 3 games remaining before the B1G tournament. Wednesday they host Wisconsin, then go to Minnesota on Saturday before having the week off and hosting MSU to close out the season.
Michigan is still on the outside of the NCAA tournament. A win over Wisconsin would go a long way to helping their cause. Outside of that M would need to win the other two games an probably a couple tourney games to have much chance to make the Big Dance...
The team can be annoying to watch, they still have long stretches where they don't score. Am I the only one who thinks Darius Morris dribbles too much? They have almost no offensive rebounding. Zack Novak is still playing the 4 most of the time and taller teams just eat him up... I don't have a problem with "settling" for 3-point shots, as long as we have decent shooters. Douglass and Novak have struggled the past few games and need to get it turned around. This has been offset by the amazing couple of weeks Hardaway was had. He's really on a tear, he's set and reset his career scoring high a few times in the past week.
This is still a very flawed team, but I don't think that falls solely on the lap of Beilein, as much as M's football failures were RR's responsibility.
Last season was supposed to be a step forward after M finally made the Tournament in 08-09. The team fell apart, presumably because Manny Harris wasn't interested in Beilein's system. Whether this team makes the NCAA or settles for the NIT, Beilein can't afford M to fall back again after a second positive season.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
I don't understand the NCAA ruling
From what I've read, the NCAA's decision in the investigation into the Cam Newton incident doesn't make any sense.
Ultimately they ruled that his dad did seek money from (at least) Mississippi State, but that since Cam didn't know about it, he's not punished. Since there is no evidence that Auburn paid any money, they're not punished.
Even the scourge of college athletics, Sonny Vaccaro, admits this makes it free reign for players handlers to go out and ask for money with the pretense that the player doesn't know about it.
I see this as a money grab for the NCAA. A BCS game without Auburn will be less interesting than with them. A Heisman given to a player other than Cam Newton would be viewed as going to a lesser player. I almost hope he did know, ask for, and get money from Auburn in a way we'll find out about in 1-5 years so that all this gets thrown out like the Reggie Bush years.
Ultimately they ruled that his dad did seek money from (at least) Mississippi State, but that since Cam didn't know about it, he's not punished. Since there is no evidence that Auburn paid any money, they're not punished.
Even the scourge of college athletics, Sonny Vaccaro, admits this makes it free reign for players handlers to go out and ask for money with the pretense that the player doesn't know about it.
I see this as a money grab for the NCAA. A BCS game without Auburn will be less interesting than with them. A Heisman given to a player other than Cam Newton would be viewed as going to a lesser player. I almost hope he did know, ask for, and get money from Auburn in a way we'll find out about in 1-5 years so that all this gets thrown out like the Reggie Bush years.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Paying players in the NCAA
Lots of talk about paying college athletes again.
Ryen Russillo on espn radio's Scott VanPelt Show suggested having agents pay players not the universities. He came up with a very convoluted plan that included limits on how many players an agent could have on one team as well as salary caps for the teams.
AA News alum, Jason Whitlock has a strong opinion that the NCAA is the evil doer. On WDFN Ermani and callers extended the article into the NCAA taking money from poor minority athletes in football and basketball and transferring it to white kids in lacrosse, gymnastics and swimming. I guess I can see some of that argument.
But I'm fully in the camp that they are getting paid, they're getting a full ride scholarship. I can see extending the benefits to the athletes in such a way as extending their educational opportunities. I would be in favor of making the scholarships a multi-year guarantee. Not the one year contract they are now. And ideally it would be a 4-8 year guarantee. Because the time requirements are so great, the scholarship extends past the eligibility of the player.
College football and basketball are able to compete with professional sports for two reasons:
1 -The greater numbers make it more local. There are only ~ 130 professional teams in the 4 major sports, there are almost that many FBS football teams.
2 - The myth of commonality and association. "I went to Michigan - so I have had some of the same experiences as Tate Forcier" or "I'm from the plains of Alabama so I like Auburn." It doesn't matter that Forcier is from southern California and our shared experiences likely end at English 125, he's my guy because he wears the winged helmet. suppose the "plains of Alabama" thought does extend somewhat to professional sports, after all I'm a fan of all the professional teams in Michigan. However, I've never felt as strongly about those teams triumphs and failures as I do UofMs.
In addition to extending the scholarships, lets end the age limits in the NBA and NFL. If the athletes want to get paid right away, let them go right to the pros. That should greatly diminish the ridiculous one-and-done players in basketball. I would be interested in how it would work in football. How many 18 year old kids could go right to the NFL? I think it would have to be less.
I don't think the TV money machine would be affected one bit. The alums want to see their team much more than their teams particular players...
Ryen Russillo on espn radio's Scott VanPelt Show suggested having agents pay players not the universities. He came up with a very convoluted plan that included limits on how many players an agent could have on one team as well as salary caps for the teams.
AA News alum, Jason Whitlock has a strong opinion that the NCAA is the evil doer. On WDFN Ermani and callers extended the article into the NCAA taking money from poor minority athletes in football and basketball and transferring it to white kids in lacrosse, gymnastics and swimming. I guess I can see some of that argument.
But I'm fully in the camp that they are getting paid, they're getting a full ride scholarship. I can see extending the benefits to the athletes in such a way as extending their educational opportunities. I would be in favor of making the scholarships a multi-year guarantee. Not the one year contract they are now. And ideally it would be a 4-8 year guarantee. Because the time requirements are so great, the scholarship extends past the eligibility of the player.
College football and basketball are able to compete with professional sports for two reasons:
1 -The greater numbers make it more local. There are only ~ 130 professional teams in the 4 major sports, there are almost that many FBS football teams.
2 - The myth of commonality and association. "I went to Michigan - so I have had some of the same experiences as Tate Forcier" or "I'm from the plains of Alabama so I like Auburn." It doesn't matter that Forcier is from southern California and our shared experiences likely end at English 125, he's my guy because he wears the winged helmet. suppose the "plains of Alabama" thought does extend somewhat to professional sports, after all I'm a fan of all the professional teams in Michigan. However, I've never felt as strongly about those teams triumphs and failures as I do UofMs.
In addition to extending the scholarships, lets end the age limits in the NBA and NFL. If the athletes want to get paid right away, let them go right to the pros. That should greatly diminish the ridiculous one-and-done players in basketball. I would be interested in how it would work in football. How many 18 year old kids could go right to the NFL? I think it would have to be less.
I don't think the TV money machine would be affected one bit. The alums want to see their team much more than their teams particular players...
Thursday, May 20, 2010
College football "Manifest Destiny"
Interesting article about the future realignment of college football here. His realignment of teams into four 16 team conferences is similar to what I did. Except of course he cuts the 120 teams down to 64. Interesting cut format. He starts by talking all teams that averaged over 50,000 in home attendance. 46 teams made that cut. Then looking at teams with over 30,000 avg home attendance that added another 26 teams for the 18 spots. Several teams from current BCS conferences miss the final cut. Duke, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt, Indiana and UConn are mentioned as omitted.
He makes no mention about what happens to the FBS tames that didn't make the 64 team cut. But one commenter made an interesting suggestion, treating it like a European Futbol league where the top non-qualifiers have a chance to replace the "worst" teams in the sweet 64 each season.
I like the concept - But I'd probably stick to six or eight 10 or 12 team conferences. so maybe 60-72 or 80-96 teams would make more sense to me.
He makes no mention about what happens to the FBS tames that didn't make the 64 team cut. But one commenter made an interesting suggestion, treating it like a European Futbol league where the top non-qualifiers have a chance to replace the "worst" teams in the sweet 64 each season.
I like the concept - But I'd probably stick to six or eight 10 or 12 team conferences. so maybe 60-72 or 80-96 teams would make more sense to me.
Monday, May 3, 2010
FBS realignment Follow up
I started here with a realignment of the 120 FBS college football teams into ten 12 team conferences. I wanted to look at the relative strengths of the proposed conferences. Here are the results based on one year of CFRC final standings:
Based on this data, Michigan's Great Lakes Conference was arguably the weakest last season - a case could also be made for the Ohio Valley and Gulf conferences. The Mid-Atlantic, NorthEast and SouthEast were the strongest.
I was curious if there is a built in bias towards BCS schools. The Mid Atlantic conference does have 11 BCS school out of the 12 (poor ECU) at the other end of the scale The Rio Grande and the Ohio Valley only have 4 BCS schools. The GL has a respectable 7 of 12 (counting Notre Dame).
I hope to follow these proposed conferences this season to see how they fair.
| Conference | Range | Mean | Median | Std Dv |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Far West | 20-113 | 61.67 | 57.00 | 28.21 |
| Mountain | 4-110 | 53.42 | 47.50 | 37.11 |
| Plains | 11-89 | 46.50 | 54.50 | 25.63 |
| Rio Grande | 3-117 | 69.92 | 71.50 | 41.66 |
| Great Lakes | 32-120 | 78.33 | 79.00 | 25.94 |
| Ohio Valley | 6-119 | 75.92 | 79.50 | 37.08 |
| Gulf | 14-111 | 72.58 | 88.00 | 34.97 |
| South East | 1-107 | 49.08 | 49.00 | 32.96 |
| Mid Atl | 8-82 | 44.08 | 39.50 | 24.32 |
| NorthEast | 10-104 | 53.50 | 41.50 | 31.61 |
Based on this data, Michigan's Great Lakes Conference was arguably the weakest last season - a case could also be made for the Ohio Valley and Gulf conferences. The Mid-Atlantic, NorthEast and SouthEast were the strongest.
I was curious if there is a built in bias towards BCS schools. The Mid Atlantic conference does have 11 BCS school out of the 12 (poor ECU) at the other end of the scale The Rio Grande and the Ohio Valley only have 4 BCS schools. The GL has a respectable 7 of 12 (counting Notre Dame).
I hope to follow these proposed conferences this season to see how they fair.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
FBS Conference realignment
With all the talk about adding teams to the Big1T1en, I thought maybe the best thing to do would be to realign all the conferences. My criteria was create ten twelve team conferences. Based geographically. This would result in 16 team tournament with the conference champions and 6 at large teams.
Here is my first attempt at the 10 conferences:
Here is my first attempt at the 10 conferences:
| Far West | Mountain | Plains | Rio Grande | Great Lakes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arizona | Ore St | Iowa | Baylor | Ball St |
| ASU | WSU | Iowa St | Houston | CMU |
| Cal | Oregon | Kansas | NMSt | EMU |
| Fresno St | Washington | KSU | No Tex | Illinois |
| Hawaii | Colorado | Minnesota | Rice | Indiana |
| Nevada | BYU | Mizzou | SMU | Michigan |
| SDSU | Utah | Nebraska | TCU | MSU |
| SJSt | Air Force | Ok St | Texas | NIU |
| Stanford | Colorado St | Oklahoma | Tx A&M | Northwestern |
| UCLA | Boise St | Tulsa | Tx Tech | Notre D |
| UNLV | Idaho | Wisconsin | UNM | Purdue |
| USC | Utah St | Wyoming | UTEP | WMU |
| Ohio Valley | Gulf | South East | Mid Atlantic | NorthEast |
| Akron | Ark St | Alabama | Clemson | Army |
| BGSU | Arkansas | Auburn | Duke | BC |
| Cincinnati | La Tech | Fl Atl | ECU | Buffalo |
| Kent | LSU | Fl Int | Ga Tech | Maryland |
| Kentucky | Memphis | Florida | Georgia | Navy |
| Louisville | Miss St | FSU | NC St | Penn St |
| Marshall | Mississippi | Miami | So Carolina | Pitt |
| Miami (OH) | So Miss | MTSU | Tennessee | Rutgers |
| Ohio | Tulane | S. Flo | UNC | Syracuse |
| Ohio St | ULL | Troy | Va Tech | Temple |
| Toledo | ULM | UAB | Virginia | U Conn |
| WKU | Vandy | UCF | Wake | WVU |
Friday, April 23, 2010
Sam and Ira argument on WTKA
I usually like to disagree with both of Ira and Sam from WTKA, however today I have to agree with both.
They were discussing the money going to the NCAA as part of the new basketball tournament deal. Sam is arguing that since there is no change to the labor cost (because the athletes work for free) any increase is just profit for the NCAA. He wants the basketball players to get part of the pie.
Ira is making the argument I have long made - that money goes to pay for the the majority of the sports that lose money. I do agree with Sam that the recent meteoric increase in coaching salaries probably disproves some of that. No one (except the coaches of non-revenue sports) seems to raise an eyebrow that the basketball and football coaches make substantially more than the other sports.
They just determined that the full contract would provide about $600 a year to each NCAA Division I athlete - they don't know what the divisor would be if they included all divisions.
To me the whole thing is just chasing its own tail. There is so much money to be made that the coaches (and everyone else) want more, so they expand to get more money to pay the higher costs...
Late addition - the WLA took a look at this issue as well - chitownblue wanting athletes to get some of the money with mjv arguing against much of this in the comments.
They were discussing the money going to the NCAA as part of the new basketball tournament deal. Sam is arguing that since there is no change to the labor cost (because the athletes work for free) any increase is just profit for the NCAA. He wants the basketball players to get part of the pie.
Ira is making the argument I have long made - that money goes to pay for the the majority of the sports that lose money. I do agree with Sam that the recent meteoric increase in coaching salaries probably disproves some of that. No one (except the coaches of non-revenue sports) seems to raise an eyebrow that the basketball and football coaches make substantially more than the other sports.
They just determined that the full contract would provide about $600 a year to each NCAA Division I athlete - they don't know what the divisor would be if they included all divisions.
To me the whole thing is just chasing its own tail. There is so much money to be made that the coaches (and everyone else) want more, so they expand to get more money to pay the higher costs...
Late addition - the WLA took a look at this issue as well - chitownblue wanting athletes to get some of the money with mjv arguing against much of this in the comments.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
New 68 team NCAA Men's Tournament
I like the restraint the NCAA showed in limiting the expansion to 68 teams instead of 96 originally thrown around. What I don't like is putting teams that earned their way to the tournament by WINNING their conference treated like they red-headed step children in their own little mini bracket in Dayton on Tuesday.
Way not have the last 8 at large teams compete in the play-in games instead of 8 conference champs? Wouldn't there be more interest in the games if they were Virginia Tech vs. Cal instead of Arkansas Pine-Bluff vs. Winthrop? Instead of getting teams people would be interested in seeing play - more TV money and better attendance in Dayton, we settle for keeping the little guy down.
Way not have the last 8 at large teams compete in the play-in games instead of 8 conference champs? Wouldn't there be more interest in the games if they were Virginia Tech vs. Cal instead of Arkansas Pine-Bluff vs. Winthrop? Instead of getting teams people would be interested in seeing play - more TV money and better attendance in Dayton, we settle for keeping the little guy down.
Friday, April 2, 2010
96 team field for the NCAA tournament
It has become pretty clear that the NCAA Men's Basketball tournament is expanding to 96 teams in the near future. Here is a transcript of the press conference when the rolled out "how the theoretical structure of the 96 team tournament might go." The Q&A section gets pretty nasty. AA.com has implied that John Feinstein is the lead questioner.
It took me a while to figure out how their plan works. It looks like there would be 16 games each on Thur/Fri (the 9 seed vs 24 seed, 10 vs 23 etc.). The winners would take on the 1-8 seeds who got byes (9 vs 24 winner faces 8 etc), in 16 games each on Sat/Sun.
Then the winners would play again - 1/(16/17)winner against 8/(9/24)winner - Tue/Wed.
From here the tournament stays the same with the Sweet 16 games are Thu/Fri and Elite 8 Sat/Sun and the final four the next Sat/Mon.
Feinstein Points out there is no chance for winners will go to any class that second week. He makes a strong point of comparison on how the NCAA couldn't possibly have a football playoff because of how much school the players would miss yet there is little concern for the missed class here.
I know you're shocked, the main issue is making money!
It took me a while to figure out how their plan works. It looks like there would be 16 games each on Thur/Fri (the 9 seed vs 24 seed, 10 vs 23 etc.). The winners would take on the 1-8 seeds who got byes (9 vs 24 winner faces 8 etc), in 16 games each on Sat/Sun.
Then the winners would play again - 1/(16/17)winner against 8/(9/24)winner - Tue/Wed.
From here the tournament stays the same with the Sweet 16 games are Thu/Fri and Elite 8 Sat/Sun and the final four the next Sat/Mon.
Feinstein Points out there is no chance for winners will go to any class that second week. He makes a strong point of comparison on how the NCAA couldn't possibly have a football playoff because of how much school the players would miss yet there is little concern for the missed class here.
I know you're shocked, the main issue is making money!
Sunday, March 28, 2010
MSU Basketball
I don't like Tennessee, I think Bruce Pearl is a crook (but I like that style of basketball) so I'm rooting for MSU!
Friday, March 26, 2010
NCAA Hockey
The NCAA Men's Division I hockey tournament starts today. Here's the match-ups:
East Regional (Albany - Fri/Sat)
1Denver vs. 4RIT
2 Cornell vs. 3 UNH
West (St Paul - Fri/Sat)
1 Wisconsin vs 4 Vermont
2St. Cloud St vs 3 NMU
Northeast (Worcester - Sat/Sun)
1 BC vs 4Alaska
2North Dakota vs 3 Yale
Midwest (Ft. Wayne - Sat/Sun)
1Miami (OH) vs 4 Alabama-Huntsville
2Bemidji St vs 3 Michigan
My picks to make it out to the Frozen 4 in Detroit are Denver, St Cloud St, BC, and Michigan
BTW, I have 2 extra Frozen 4 tickets if anyone is interested.
East Regional (Albany - Fri/Sat)
1Denver vs. 4RIT
2 Cornell vs. 3 UNH
West (St Paul - Fri/Sat)
1 Wisconsin vs 4 Vermont
2St. Cloud St vs 3 NMU
Northeast (Worcester - Sat/Sun)
1 BC vs 4Alaska
2North Dakota vs 3 Yale
Midwest (Ft. Wayne - Sat/Sun)
1Miami (OH) vs 4 Alabama-Huntsville
2Bemidji St vs 3 Michigan
My picks to make it out to the Frozen 4 in Detroit are Denver, St Cloud St, BC, and Michigan
BTW, I have 2 extra Frozen 4 tickets if anyone is interested.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
NCAA and Michigan
I don't have nearly the strong opinions about whether the NCAA report was "devastating" or "not a big deal", but I have a few thoughts:
1) The U (Brandon, Coleman, Rodriguez) is clearly trying to downplay things, and it seems a bit disingenuous. We'll see if I'm reading that wrong.
2) Clearly, RR and his staff did things that were wrong, and the Freep was right.
3) Regardless of when RR leaves (which will likely be before the 6 years of my original prediction) the consensus will be that his hire/tenure has been a mistake. We'll see how long it will take until that time comes.
4) Brandon's comments during his first interviews after he was announced AD that everybody has to be on the same team and we don't need a splintered Athletic Department/Michigan Family, etc. was just made even less likely after the announcement today.
1) The U (Brandon, Coleman, Rodriguez) is clearly trying to downplay things, and it seems a bit disingenuous. We'll see if I'm reading that wrong.
2) Clearly, RR and his staff did things that were wrong, and the Freep was right.
3) Regardless of when RR leaves (which will likely be before the 6 years of my original prediction) the consensus will be that his hire/tenure has been a mistake. We'll see how long it will take until that time comes.
4) Brandon's comments during his first interviews after he was announced AD that everybody has to be on the same team and we don't need a splintered Athletic Department/Michigan Family, etc. was just made even less likely after the announcement today.
Monday, February 15, 2010
one trophy post to rule them all
Here is the full hopefully unbroken chain of college football's traveling trophy from Rutgers in 1869 to Alabama in January 2010:
| Date won | date lost | Holder | Games | W | L | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/6/1869 | 11/13/1869 | Rutgers | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/13/1869 | 11/30/1876 | Princeton | 11 | 10 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/30/1876 | 11/28/1878 | Yale | 11 | 9 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/28/1878 | 11/18/1882 | Princeton | 26 | 21 | 1 | 4 |
| 11/18/1882 | 11/25/1882 | Harvard | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/25/1882 | 11/21/1885 | Yale | 27 | 25 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/21/1885 | 11/12/1887 | Princeton | 17 | 15 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/12/1887 | 11/24/1887 | Harvard | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/24/1887 | 11/28/1889 | Yale | 30 | 29 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/28/1889 | 11/27/1890 | Princeton | 14 | 12 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/27/1890 | 11/30/1893 | Yale | 37 | 36 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/30/1893 | 11/10/1894 | Princeton | 8 | 7 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/10/1894 | 10/24/1896 | Penn | 26 | 25 | 1 | 0 |
| 10/24/1896 | 10/23/1897 | Lafayette | 13 | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/23/1897 | 11/5/1898 | Penn | 16 | 15 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/5/1898 | 11/24/1900 | Harvard | 24 | 22 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/24/1900 | 11/23/1901 | Yale | 13 | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/23/1901 | 11/22/1902 | Harvard | 13 | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/22/1902 | 11/14/1903 | Yale | 12 | 11 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/14/1903 | 10/15/1904 | Princeton | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 |
| 10/15/1904 | 10/29/1904 | Navy | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/29/1904 | 10/7/1905 | Swarthmore | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| 10/7/1905 | 10/13/1906 | Penn | 15 | 12 | 1 | 2 |
| 10/13/1906 | 11/10/1906 | Swarthmore | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/10/1906 | 10/19/1907 | Navy | 9 | 7 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/19/1907 | 11/9/2007 | Harvard | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/9/2007 | 11/7/1908 | Carlisle | 10 | 8 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/7/1908 | 11/20/1909 | Harvard | 11 | 10 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/20/1909 | 10/15/1910 | Yale | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 |
| 10/15/1910 | 10/29/1910 | Army | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/29/1910 | 11/4/1911 | Harvard | 9 | 7 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/4/1911 | 11/2/1912 | Princeton | 9 | 8 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/2/1912 | 10/23/1915 | Harvard | 26 | 23 | 1 | 2 |
| 10/23/1915 | 10/28/1916 | Cornell | 8 | 7 | 1 | 0 |
| 10/28/1916 | 11/18/1916 | Harvard | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/18/1916 | 11/25/1916 | Brown | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/25/1916 | 10/27/1917 | Colgate | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/27/1917 | 11/3/1917 | Brown | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/3/1917 | 11/16/1918 | Syracuse | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 11/16/1918 | 10/25/1919 | MICHIGAN | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 10/25/1919 | 11/22/1919 | OSU | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/22/1919 | 11/13/1920 | Illinois | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 11/13/1920 | 11/19/1921 | Wisconsin | 8 | 6 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/19/1921 | 10/28/1922 | Chicago | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 10/28/1922 | 10/20/1923 | Princeton | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 10/20/1923 | 11/10/1923 | Notre Dame | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/10/1923 | 11/24/1923 | Nebraska | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/24/1923 | 11/8/1924 | Syracuse | 7 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/8/1924 | 10/17/1925 | West Virginia Wesleyan | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 10/17/1925 | 10/31/1925 | Lehigh | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/31/1925 | 11/26/1925 | Mulenberg (PA) | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/26/1925 | 9/25/1926 | Villanova | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/25/1926 | 10/2/1926 | Lebanon Valley (PA) | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/2/1926 | 10/16/1926 | Penn State | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/16/1926 | 11/27/1926 | Notre Dame | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 11/27/1926 | 10/15/1927 | Carnegie Tech | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 10/15/1927 | 10/13/1928 | Washington & Jefferson | 8 | 5 | 1 | 2 |
| 10/13/1928 | 10/27/1928 | Duquesne | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/27/1928 | 11/3/2028 | Geneva (PA) | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/3/2028 | 11/17/1928 | Grove City | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/17/1928 | 11/9/1929 | Villanova | 8 | 6 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/9/1929 | 11/23/1929 | Bucknell | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/23/1929 | 11/15/1930 | Fordham | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 11/15/1930 | 11/7/1931 | St. Mary's | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 11/7/1931 | 11/21/1931 | Olympic Club | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/21/1931 | 11/28/1931 | Loyola Marymount | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/28/1931 | 9/24/1932 | San Diego Marines | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 9/24/1932 | 10/1/1932 | Fresno State | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/1/1932 | 10/15/1932 | West Coast Army | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/15/1932 | 10/22/1932 | Stanford | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/22/1932 | 11/11/1933 | USC | 13 | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/11/1933 | 1/31/1934 | Stanford | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1/31/1934 | 10/20/1934 | Columbia | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/20/1934 | 11/17/1934 | Navy | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 11/17/1934 | 10/19/1935 | Pittsburgh | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 10/19/1935 | 11/9/1935 | Notre Dame | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/9/1935 | 11/21/1936 | Northwestern | 10 | 8 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/21/1936 | 10/16/1937 | Notre Dame | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 10/16/1937 | 10/23/1937 | Carnegie Tech | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/23/1937 | 11/6/1937 | Temple | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/6/1937 | 1/1/1938 | MSU | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1938 | 10/8/1938 | Auburn | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/8/1938 | 1/1/1940 | Tennessee | 19 | 18 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1940 | 10/26/1940 | USC | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| 10/26/1940 | 10/11/1941 | Stanford | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 10/11/1941 | 10/25/1941 | Oregon State | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/25/1941 | 12/6/1941 | Washington St | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 12/6/1941 | 1/1/1942 | Texas A&M | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1942 | 10/31/1942 | Alabama | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 10/31/1942 | 11/21/1942 | Georgia | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/21/1942 | 10/14/1944 | Auburn | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 10/14/1944 | 11/4/1944 | Georgia Tech | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/4/1944 | 10/6/1945 | Duke | 7 | 6 | 1 | |
| 10/6/1945 | 12/1/1945 | Navy | 7 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
| 12/1/1945 | 10/25/1947 | Army | 15 | 12 | 1 | 2 |
| 10/25/1947 | 10/2/1948 | Columbia | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 10/2/1948 | 10/9/1948 | Harvard | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/9/1948 | 10/23/1948 | Cornell | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/23/1948 | 12/2/1950 | Army | 22 | 20 | 1 | 1 |
| 12/2/1950 | 10/6/1951 | Navy | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/6/1951 | 10/11/1952 | Princeton | 10 | 9 | 1 | |
| 10/11/1952 | 11/1/1952 | Penn | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/1/1952 | 11/8/1952 | Penn State | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/8/1952 | 1/1/1953 | Syracuse | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1953 | 9/18/1953 | Alabama | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/18/1953 | 10/31/1953 | So. Mississippi | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 10/31/1953 | 11/7/1953 | Memphis | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/7/1953 | 10/2/1954 | Arkansas St | 6 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/2/1954 | 10/15/1954 | Mississippi St | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/15/1954 | 11/6/1954 | Miami (FL) | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/6/1954 | 10/29/1955 | Auburn | 10 | 8 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/29/1955 | 11/12/1955 | Tulane | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/12/1955 | 11/26/1955 | Vanderbilt | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/26/1955 | 1/1/1957 | Tennessee | 11 | 10 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1957 | 10/5/1957 | Baylor | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/5/1957 | 10/11/1957 | Miami (FL) | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/11/1957 | 10/19/1957 | North Carolina | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/19/1957 | 10/26/1957 | Maryland | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/26/1957 | 11/16/1957 | Tennessee | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/16/1957 | 11/1/1958 | Mississippi | 9 | 7 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/1/1958 | 11/7/1959 | LSU | 12 | 11 | 1 | |
| 11/7/1959 | 11/14/1959 | Tennessee | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/14/1959 | 11/4/1961 | Mississippi | 20 | 18 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/4/1961 | 11/3/1962 | LSU | 11 | 9 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/3/1962 | 1/1/1964 | Mississippi | 14 | 11 | 1 | 2 |
| 1/1/1964 | 1/1/1965 | Alabama | 11 | 10 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1965 | 10/16/1965 | Texas | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 10/16/1965 | 1/1/1966 | Arkansas | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1966 | 9/24/1966 | LSU | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/24/1966 | 10/1/1966 | Rice | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/1/1966 | 10/8/1966 | Tennessee | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/8/1966 | 11/26/1966 | Georgia Tech | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 11/26/1966 | 10/14/1967 | Georgia | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 10/14/1967 | 11/18/1967 | Mississippi | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/18/1967 | 1/1/1968 | Tennessee | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1968 | 9/21/1968 | Oklahoma | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/21/1968 | 9/28/1968 | Notre Dame | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/28/1968 | 10/12/1968 | Purdue | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/12/1968 | 11/22/1969 | OSU | 16 | 15 | 1 | |
| 11/22/1969 | 1/1/1970 | MICHIGAN | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1970 | 10/10/1970 | USC | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/10/1970 | 11/14/1970 | Stanford | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 11/14/1970 | 11/21/1970 | Air Force | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/21/1970 | 12/12/1970 | Colorado | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 12/12/1970 | 9/18/1971 | Tulane | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/18/1971 | 11/13/1971 | Georgia | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 11/13/1971 | 11/27/1971 | Auburn | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/27/1971 | 1/1/1972 | Alabama | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1972 | 9/9/1972 | Nebraska | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/9/1972 | 9/23/1972 | UCLA | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/23/1972 | 11/25/1972 | MICHIGAN | 9 | 8 | 1 | |
| 11/25/1972 | 1/1/1973 | OSU | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1973 | 10/27/1973 | USC | 7 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/27/1973 | 9/28/1974 | Notre Dame | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 9/28/1974 | 10/5/1974 | Purdue | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/5/1974 | 10/19/1974 | Duke | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/19/1974 | 10/26/1974 | Clemson | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/26/1974 | 9/20/1975 | Tennessee | 7 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
| 9/20/1975 | 10/4/1975 | UCLA | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/4/1975 | 1/1/1976 | OSU | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1976 | 11/20/1976 | UCLA | 11 | 9 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/20/1976 | 10/8/1977 | USC | 7 | 6 | 1 | |
| 10/8/1977 | 9/23/1978 | Alabama | 10 | 9 | 1 | |
| 9/23/1978 | 10/14/1978 | USC | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/14/1978 | 10/28/1978 | Arizona St | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/28/1978 | 11/11/1978 | Washington | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/11/1978 | 11/15/1980 | USC | 25 | 22 | 1 | 2 |
| 11/15/1980 | 1/1/1981 | Washington | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1981 | 9/12/1981 | MICHIGAN | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/12/1981 | 9/19/1981 | Wisconsin | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/19/1981 | 9/26/1981 | UCLA | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/26/1981 | 10/24/1981 | Iowa | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 10/24/1981 | 10/31/1981 | Minnesota | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/31/1981 | 11/21/1981 | MICHIGAN | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 11/21/1981 | 9/25/1982 | OSU | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 9/25/1982 | 10/9/1982 | Stanford | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/9/1982 | 11/13/1982 | Arizona St | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 11/13/1982 | 11/20/1982 | Washington | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/20/1982 | 9/10/1983 | Washington St | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/10/1983 | 9/17/1983 | MICHIGAN | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/17/1983 | 9/24/1983 | Washington | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/24/1983 | 10/1/1983 | LSU | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/1/1983 | 10/29/1983 | Florida | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/29/1983 | 8/27/1984 | Auburn | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 8/27/1984 | 9/8/1984 | Miami (FL) | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/8/1984 | 9/15/1984 | MICHIGAN | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/15/1984 | 11/10/1984 | Washington | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 11/10/1984 | 11/17/1984 | USC | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/17/1984 | 9/28/1985 | UCLA | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
| 9/28/1985 | 10/19/1985 | Washington | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/19/1985 | 11/2/1985 | Oregon State | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/2/1985 | 11/9/1985 | Arizona | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/9/1985 | 11/23/1985 | UCLA | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/23/1985 | 12/28/1985 | USC | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 12/28/1985 | 10/25/1986 | Alabama | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 10/25/1986 | 9/12/1987 | Penn State | 7 | 6 | 1 | |
| 9/12/1987 | 9/19/1987 | Alabama | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/19/1987 | 10/3/1987 | Florida | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/3/1987 | 11/7/1987 | LSU | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 11/7/1987 | 11/14/1987 | Alabama | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/14/1987 | 11/21/1987 | Notre Dame | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/21/1987 | 1/1/1988 | Penn State | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1988 | 9/17/1988 | Clemson | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 9/17/1988 | 9/2/1989 | Florida St | 10 | 9 | 1 | |
| 9/2/1989 | 9/9/1989 | So. Mississippi | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/9/1989 | 9/23/1989 | Mississippi St | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/23/1989 | 9/30/1989 | Georgia | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/30/1989 | 10/28/1989 | South Carolina | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/28/1989 | 11/4/1989 | NC State | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/4/1989 | 1/1/1990 | Virginia | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1990 | 9/8/1990 | Illinois | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/8/1990 | 9/29/1990 | Arizona | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 9/29/1990 | 10/27/1990 | California | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 10/27/1990 | 11/10/1990 | Washington | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/10/1990 | 11/17/1990 | UCLA | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/17/1990 | 11/24/1990 | USC | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/24/1990 | 1/1/1991 | Notre Dame | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 1/1/1991 | 9/14/1991 | Colorado | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/14/1991 | 10/12/1991 | Baylor | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 10/12/1991 | 10/19/1991 | Rice | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/19/1991 | 10/26/1991 | TCU | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/26/1991 | 11/16/1991 | Baylor | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/16/1991 | 9/3/1992 | Texas Tech | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/3/1992 | 9/19/1992 | Oklahoma | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/19/1992 | 10/3/1992 | USC | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/3/1992 | 11/7/1992 | Washington | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 11/7/1992 | 11/14/1992 | Arizona | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/14/1992 | 11/21/1992 | USC | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/21/1992 | 9/4/1993 | UCLA | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/4/1993 | 10/9/1993 | California | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 10/9/1993 | 10/16/1993 | Washington | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/16/1993 | 11/13/1993 | UCLA | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 11/13/1993 | 11/26/1993 | Arizona St | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/26/1993 | 10/8/1994 | Arizona | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 10/8/1994 | 10/22/1994 | Colorado St | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/22/1994 | 11/5/1994 | Utah | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/5/1994 | 11/12/1994 | New Mexico | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/12/1994 | 9/9/1995 | Wyoming | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/9/1995 | 9/16/1995 | Air Force | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/16/1995 | 9/30/1995 | Colorado St | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 9/30/1995 | 10/14/1995 | BYU | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/14/1995 | 11/24/1995 | Arizona St | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 11/24/1995 | 9/7/1996 | Arizona | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/7/1996 | 9/21/1996 | Iowa | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/21/1996 | 10/19/1996 | Tulsa | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/19/1996 | 9/6/1997 | BYU | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 9/6/1997 | 9/20/1997 | Washington | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/20/1997 | 10/10/1998 | Nebraska | 16 | 15 | 1 | |
| 10/10/1998 | 11/27/1998 | Texas A&M | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 11/27/1998 | 8/28/1999 | Texas | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 8/28/1999 | 9/18/1999 | NC State | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 9/18/1999 | 10/7/2000 | Florida St | 15 | 14 | 1 | |
| 10/7/2000 | 1/3/2003 | Miami (FL) | 32 | 31 | 1 | |
| 1/3/2003 | 10/11/2003 | OSU | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 10/11/2003 | 10/18/2003 | Wisconsin | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/18/2003 | 10/25/2003 | Purdue | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/25/2003 | 1/1/2004 | MICHIGAN | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 1/1/2004 | 1/4/2006 | USC | 26 | 25 | 1 | |
| 1/4/2006 | 9/9/2006 | Texas | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9/9/2006 | 1/8/2007 | OSU | 11 | 10 | 1 | |
| 1/8/2007 | 9/29/2007 | Florida | 5 | 4 | 1 | |
| 9/29/2007 | 10/20/2007 | Auburn | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 10/20/2007 | 11/23/2007 | LSU | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| 11/23/2007 | 1/1/2008 | Arkansas | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 1/1/2008 | 10/11/2008 | Missouri | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| 10/11/2008 | 10/25/2008 | Oklahoma St | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/25/2008 | 11/1/2008 | Texas | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/1/2008 | 11/22/2008 | Texas Tech | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 11/22/2008 | 1/8/2009 | Oklahoma | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1/8/2009 | 12/5/2009 | Florida | 13 | 12 | 1 | |
| 12/5/2009 | Alabama | 1 | 1 |
Trophy final(?) update
I think this is it. I was able to do some homework this President's Day and tracked down the information that closes all the gaps.
Here is the portion of the table beginning with St Mary's loss to Olympic Club that now connects back to Stanford from 1931-1933:
Every plus seemed to have its own minus. The loss by Olympic Club to Loyola Marymount got us back into college football, only to have Loyola lose the next week to the San Diego Marines. The Marine lost right away to Fresno State - again back to a real college. Then Fresno gave it back to West Coast Army!?!? West Coast Army won again the next week against Univ of San Francisco, before getting us back to real college the next week in a loss to Stanford. From here it connects back to what we already had. I'll post the full updated list in the next post.
Here is the portion of the table beginning with St Mary's loss to Olympic Club that now connects back to Stanford from 1931-1933:
| date won | date lost | team | games | w | l | t |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/15/1930 | 11/7/1931 | St. Mary's | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 11/7/1931 | 11/21/1931 | Olympic Club | 1 | 1 | ||
| 11/21/1931 | 11/28/1931 | Loyola Marymount | 1 | 1 | ||
| 11/28/1931 | 9/24/1932 | San Diego Marines | 1 | 1 | ||
| 9/24/1932 | 10/1/1932 | Fresno St | 1 | 1 | ||
| 10/1/1932 | 10/15/1932 | West Coast Army | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 10/15/1932 | 10/22/1932 | Stanford | 1 | 1 | ||
| 10/22/1932 | 11/11/1933 | USC | 13 | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/11/1933 | 1/1/1934 | Stanford | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Every plus seemed to have its own minus. The loss by Olympic Club to Loyola Marymount got us back into college football, only to have Loyola lose the next week to the San Diego Marines. The Marine lost right away to Fresno State - again back to a real college. Then Fresno gave it back to West Coast Army!?!? West Coast Army won again the next week against Univ of San Francisco, before getting us back to real college the next week in a loss to Stanford. From here it connects back to what we already had. I'll post the full updated list in the next post.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Traveling Trophy Update
I did some more investigation into the Mythical All-Time Traveling Trophy. As you may remember the first "problem" occurs when West Virginia Wesleyan defeats Syracuse in 1924.
The main databases used Horner and College Football Data Warehouse do not show all WVW games. Attempts were made to contact WVW directly but they have never responded.
Greg from MVictors discovered a loss that we had missed in an earlier draft. Last night I confirmed that loss was the first and confirmed the 7 victories in between via the WVW Student Newspaper.
Here is a table of the surrounding data:
| Date won | date lost | Holder | Games | W | L | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/28/1922 | 10/20/1923 | Princeton | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 |
| 10/20/1923 | 11/10/1923 | Notre Dame | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| 11/10/1923 | 11/24/1923 | Nebraska | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 11/24/1923 | 11/8/1924 | Syracuse | 7 | 5 | 1 | 4 |
| 11/8/1924 | 10/17/1925 | West Virginia Wesleyan | 8 | 7 | 1 | 0 |
| 10/17/1925 | 10/31/1925 | Lehigh | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 10/31/1925 | 11/26/1925 | Mulenberg (PA) | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
This closes the book on the long debated WVW portion of the trophy's travels. The next are of "suspect" data is when St. Mary's loses to the Olympic Club in 1931.
| Date won | date lost | Holder | Games | W | L | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/15/1930 | 11/7/1931 | St. Mary's | 8 | 7 | 1 | |
| 11/7/1931 | 11/?/1931 | Olympic Club | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/?/1931 | 11/??/1931 | Loyola Marymount | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 11/??/1931 | 10/?/1932 | San Diego Marines | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/?/1932 | 10/15/1932 | Loyola Marymount | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| 10/15/1932 | 11/11/1933 | USC | 14 | 12 | 1 | 1 |
The Olympic Club is a San Francisco area athletic club that played west coast college teams from 1891-1934. This makes it difficult to verify their full schedules.
I'm more confident that Alabama is the TRUE holder of the trophy, but there is still work to be done.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
NCAA Infractions
The longer we have to wait for the NCAA to finish their investigation, the more concerned I become. Maybe that should make me less concerned. I just don't know.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
sarcasmike National Championship
Florida takes on Texas at the Rose Bowl (actually at UCLA since I haven't unlocked the Rose Bowl "game" yet)
5 Texas turnovers make the difference
The final is Florida 51 Texas 21
Florida QB #15 is the game and playoff MVP (the Conn-sarcasMike trophy)
The full tournament bracket is recapped here
5 Texas turnovers make the difference
The final is Florida 51 Texas 21
Florida QB #15 is the game and playoff MVP (the Conn-sarcasMike trophy)
The full tournament bracket is recapped here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
