"The selection committee ranks the teams based on the members' evaluation of the teams' performance on the field, using conference championships won, strength of schedule, head–to–head results and comparison of results against common opponents to decide among teams that are comparable."
Let's just stop pretending that conference championships really matter now when deciding who will play for the national championship.
Conference championships used to matter back in the days of the BCS.
But in the days of a four–team playoff field, what matters is rankings and records, not conference titles.
Just ask Ohio State. The Buckeyes beat previously undefeated Wisconsin to claim the Big Ten crown, but they lost two games this season.
I've been wondering for weeks if the committee would permit a two–loss team to participate in the college football playoffs, and now we have our answer. In the brief history of the college football playoffs, no two–loss team had been included. It will remain that way this year.
As today dawned, it was common knowledge that Clemson, Oklahoma and Georgia had secured spots in college football's playoff. The drama centered on whether Ohio State, the Big Ten champ with two losses, or Alabama, a one–loss team that did not play for its conference crown, would round out the field.
That was the choice — Ohio State or Alabama. No other options.
I have also been wondering whether the committee would allow two teams from the same conference to be in the playoff field. With a field that is restricted to only four teams, I have believed that more balance was required to build national support for the playoff concept.
Again, the choice came down to Ohio State or Alabama. No other options.
Ohio State could have provided the diversity that was needed, and the Buckeyes won their conference, but they lost twice during the regular season.
With Alabama, the field leans heavily toward the South. The Crimson Tide did not win the Southeastern Conference, but Alabama did lose only once — to Auburn in the Iron Bowl.
So the integrity of the record was upheld, but the integrity of conference championships and geographical balance was not.
I have been an advocate of a larger playoff field for a long time. I believe that would provide the committee with plenty of opportunities to generate geographical balance and allow other deserving teams to have a shot at winning it all.
If you take today's rankings as an example, a playoff field involving the top eight teams would produce plenty of balance this season, driving up fan interest from coast to coast. As it is, I have to wonder how high the ratings will be in the Upper Midwest or on the West Coast.
Today's selection of Alabama and exclusion of Ohio State hastens the day when the playoff field will be expanded to eight teams. I don't know when that will happen. It could be as soon as next season, or it might be a few years beyond that, but it is coming.
I mentioned last week that the visiting team always wins when Ohio State and Oklahoma play — and so it was again when the teams met in Columbus, Ohio, last Saturday.
The Sooners moved up to #2 in the poll with their victory and face a cupcake against Tulane in Norman this week. Tulane has only had one winning season since 2002.
Obviously it is still early in the season, and many things can happen, but it is certainly looking as though we could have two programs rich in tradition — Alabama and Oklahoma — facing each other in the national championship next January.
What a game that would be.
Idle: #11 Florida State, #17 Miami (Fla.)
Friday
Illinois at #22 South Florida, 6 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: The Illini went 3–9 last year.
I doubt they can keep up with the Bulls. I pick South Florida.
Saturday
Colorado State at #1 Alabama, 6 p.m. (Central): These schools' only previous meeting came almost exactly four years ago on Alabama's home turf. And the Crimson Tide rolled, 31–6.
Alabama should win again.
Tulane at #2 Oklahoma, 5 p.m. (Central): In the old days, the fact that this game wasn't being televised would have hardly raised any eyebrows. But we live in an age when just about every team can have its games televised somewhere.
The fact that no one is picking this one up suggests to me that the expectation is for a blowout — and that is not an unreasonable expectation.
I expect Oklahoma to win.
#3 Clemson at #14 Louisville, 2:30 p.m. (Central): I'm not convinced that the defending national champs shouldn't be ranked #1, considering they have perhaps the toughest early season schedule of any of the national contenders.
A trip to Louisville the week after a match with Auburn? That's more demanding than any other early schedule in college football.
I think the Tigers are up to it. The pick is Clemson.
Texas at #4 Southern Cal, 7:30 p.m. (Central) on Fox: If you're a football fan, you must remember the last time these teams faced each other — in the Rose Bowl for the national championship on Jan. 4, 2006.
The schools had met four times before, twice in the '50s and twice in the '60s, and the Trojans won all four. But Texas triumphed in the Rose Bowl.
Southern Cal might be good enough to play for the national title this year, but Texas clearly is not. I definitely believe Southern Cal will win.
Georgia State at #5 Penn State, 6:30 p.m. (Central) on Big Ten Network: I can imagine no circumstances that could produce a Georgia State win in this game.
My pick is Penn State.
Fresno State at #6 Washington, 8:30 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12 Network: I hope Fresno State is being compensated handsomely for starting the season with road games against Alabama and Washington.
The Bulldogs lost to Alabama, and I am quite sure that Washington will win this one.
Air Force at #7 Michigan, 11 a.m. (Central) on Big Ten Network: You know, it really doesn't surprise me that Michigan is a 23½–point favorite at home.
Air Force has been better in recent years. It's not my father's Air Force.
But it will seem like old times when Michigan wins this game.
Army at #8 Ohio State, 3:30 p.m. (Central) on Fox: Ohio State is bound to be in a bad mood after losing to OU last week.
Army had a pretty good year last year, but that came on the heels of several losing seasons. It seems a little unfair for Army to have to take the punishment Ohio State would like to inflict on Oklahoma. But that is the way things go.
I expect Ohio State to prevail.
#9 Oklahoma State at Pittsburgh, 11 a.m. (Central) on ABC or ESPN2: Pittsburgh only lost by a touchdown at Oklahoma State last year — and might make it closer as the host team this year.
But I expect Oklahoma State to win.
#10 Wisconsin at Brigham Young, 2:30 p.m. (Central): Wisconsin is favored by more than two touchdowns, which sounds about right to me.
I pick Wisconsin.
#12 LSU at Mississippi State, 6 p.m. (Central): LSU has dominated this series, losing only twice since 1991.
I see no reason to expect anything different this time. I pick LSU.
Samford at #13 Georgia, 6:30 p.m. (Central) on SEC Network: There really isn't anything to say about this one except ...
I confidently pick Georgia.
Mercer at #15 Auburn, 3 p.m. (Central) on SEC Network: I refer you to the prediction immediately preceding this one.
I see even less reason to pick the visitor in this one.
Auburn is my pick.
#16 Virginia Tech at East Carolina, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on CBSSN: This is a pretty good regional rivalry. The teams played for the first time in 1956, but they really started playing each other on a nearly annual basis in the late 1980s.
Virginia Tech usually wins, but the games are frequently competitive, no matter who wins.
In this case, I am inclined to pick Virginia Tech.
#18 Kansas State at Vanderbilt, 6:30 p.m. (Central) on ESPNU: It's been more than 30 years since the only other time these schools faced each other.
Times have certainly changed. Back in 1984, Vanderbilt won. But the programs have been going in opposite directions.
Kansas State should win.
#19 Stanford at San Diego State, 9:30 p.m. (Central) on CBSSN: Stanford's football players must feel wistful when they look at the current rankings — and realize they might have been in the Top 5 if they had beaten Southern Cal.
It's bound to be a sore spot.
Beating San Diego State won't alleviate that, but nevertheless I pick Stanford.
SMU at #20 TCU, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ESPNU: These are not just old Southwest Conference rivals, they are regional rivals. Depending on traffic Dallas and Fort Worth are less than an hour apart. With a 2:30 kickoff, the Mustangs can sleep in, then board a bus and be at the stadium in plenty of time.
They might as well. I don't expect much from SMU in this game.
TCU should win.
Oregon State at #21 Washington State, 4:30 p.m. (Central) on Pac–12 Network: Historically Washington State holds the advantage in this Pac–12 series, which is 92 games old.
In recent times, though, the edge belonged to Oregon State — until Washington State won the last two meetings.
The Cougars are on the upward trajectory, and I pick Washington State to win.
#23 Tennessee at #24 Florida, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on CBS: These SEC East rivals have faced each other nearly 50 times over the years, and the Gators have won nearly 58% of the time.
They have had some good games — two of their last three meetings were decided by a single point — and they have had some blowouts.
This one could probably go either way, and that seems to be reflected in the point spread. The Gators are only favored by 4½ at home.
In an upset special, I will take Tennessee.
#25 UCLA at Memphis, 11 a.m. (Central) on ABC or ESPN2: These teams have met only once before — three years ago in Los Angeles. UCLA won the game by a touchdown.
Like Pittsburgh in its game with Oklahoma State, I expect Memphis to keep it close.
Now, we're down to one more game in college football. Well, it will be the last one after the final whistle blows tomorrow.
Clemson and Alabama are headed to Tampa for the rematch that few saw coming, and I'll be making my prediction on that game about a week from now.
Well, I saw it coming. I predicted both would win in my prediction column last week. True, Clemson was an upset special — at least as far as the bookmakers were concerned — but I was more impressed with what I saw from Clemson during the season than I was with what I saw from Ohio State. As I wrote, I had a feeling that Clemson would win.
Not sure if Clemson was 31 points better, although that sure is what it was last night.
Alabama and Washington combined for 31 points as well, but at least Washington was responsible for a touchdown — the first score of the game. I really thought the Ohio State–Clemson nightcap would be a good game.
And I am hopeful that the Alabama–Clemson rematch will be good. It was a 45–40 finish last year, and you know Clemson is eager to avenge that loss.
Dieter Kurtenbach of Fox Sports writes that it could be a long night for Alabama if Jalen Hurts doesn't get better throwing the ball in the next eight days.
Well, the national championship game is being played in nearby Arlington tonight. Kickoff is in about an hour.
Oregon and Ohio State survived the semifinals on New Year's Day and are playing for the title tonight.
They've met eight times before — most recently in the 2010 Rose Bowl. Ohio State is 8–0 in those games.
It really should be a good game. It matches two Top 10 offenses — Oregon is ranked third in the country, Ohio State is ranked ninth. I expect a lot of scoring.
Ohio State's defense is ranked well ahead of Oregon's. The Buckeyes are 17th in the nation; the Ducks are 84th.
I guess those rankings suggest that Ohio State will win the game tonight. Perhaps the Buckeyes will. They have already surprised me twice, beating Wisconsin in the Big 10 championship and then Alabama in a national semifinal — both pretty handily, too — despite being without their injured quarterback. Impressive.
But, really, I'm inclined to pick Oregon. The Ducks have the Heisman winner, and they buried Florida State, the defending national champions, on New Year's Day. That's pretty impressive as well.
So I pick Oregon to win. Perhaps it will go to overtime. Even if it doesn't, I expect it to go down to the wire.
"Evidently nobody in authority realized that a full–grown man who attached such importance to a game was, at best, immature, not to say a case of arrested development. The saddest part of the whole affair is that nobody at Ohio State saw the denouement approaching and protected Hayes from himself."
Red Smith (1905–1982)
Red Smith is one of my favorite journalists. I guess it is appropriate to call him a sports journalist, and he probably accepted that during his lifetime, but he wrote that he always "wanted to be a newspaperman and came to realize I didn't really care which side of the newspaper I worked on."
Frankly, I felt the same way. Smith had a philosophy about sports journalism that I tried to keep in mind when I worked on the sports side of newspapers.
"[P]eople go to spectator sports to have fun and then they grab the paper to read about it and have fun all over again," he wrote. "I've always tried to remember ... that sports isn't Armageddon. These are just little games that little boys can play, and it really isn't important to the future of civilization whether the Athletics or the Browns win."
Thirty–five years ago, Woody Hayes would have been smart to heed those words, especially the part about how sports isn't Armageddon. If he had, Hayes' 28–year coaching career at Ohio State might not have come to an end when it did.
Hayes had a reputation for being a disciplinarian, a man who would take young men and mold them into leaders. He was a military historian who often applied principles from military history to his coaching.
It was known that Hayes had a temper that he couldn't always control. He once tried to punch a sportswriter following a loss, but he missed and hit the brother of the sports editor of another paper instead. A few years later, he almost got into a fight with the athletic director of another school during a meeting of Big Ten Conference athletic directors and coaches.
Late in his career, he seemed to have a particular animosity for photographers. He shoved a camera in the face of a photographer before a Rose Bowl game, leading to a three–game suspension, and about a year before the 1978 Gator Bowl, he took a swing at a TV cameraman late in a loss to Michigan.
In spite of his history, no one suspected, when Dec. 29, 1978 dawned, that the Gator Bowl between #20 Ohio State and #7 Clemson in Jacksonville, Fla., that night would be Hayes' last game as a college football coach.
But when Clemson's Charlie Bauman intercepted a pass late in the game to seal a 17–15 victory, Hayes punched him in front of God and the TV cameras — and, at that moment, I knew Hayes was finished.
I'll never forget that night. I was in my grandmother's home. My family had been visiting her for Christmas, but we were frantically preparing to leave Dallas ahead of an ice storm that was expected within a few days. That night, for whatever reason, my father and I decided to stop packing and watch the football game. We both watched in utter disbelief as Hayes struck the opposing player.
An era was ending in college football. It had been kind of a comforting, reassuring era when the giants from the ranks of college coaches were always there on the sidelines of the truly big games. One by one, though, they were stepping aside, and the next generation was taking over.
It was an inevitable transition. It happens in all walks of life with the passage of time, but we all know that people still get sentimental about endings. It is true of coaches, too; people are always wistful when longtime coaches leave. The coaches themselves are often wistful. It is a bittersweet time.
In many ways, the sports world is the same as it was when Hayes walked the sideline. But in other ways it has changed dramatically. One has to wonder, in hindsight, if Hayes could have remained the Ohio State football coach for much longer.
In the years after the legends of the 20th century roamed the sidelines, that drill sergeant mentality gradually fell out of favor with college athletic directors. There may be a few of them out there, but, for the most part, they have vanished.
"... Charlie Bauman intercepted a pass and went out of bounds right where the Ohio State coach stood. That architect of young manhood laid hold of Bauman and fetched him a roundhouse right to the chops. Fists flailing, he tried to charge onto the field, but his own scholar athletes, already bruised and bleeding from their pursuit of culture, overpowered him."
Red Smith
Hayes, it was said more and more frequently, physically assaulted his players during practice, and that did bother some people at the time, but most folks were willing to ignore it as long as he didn't do that kind of thing in public. After all, this was football, a man's game, and men are tough.
Today, a college coach who struck an athlete, whether in view of only his peers or a national TV audience, would most likely get the boot regardless of who he was. Politics — and political correctness — won't tolerate that sort of thing.
Three decades ago, schools were more protective of their star coaches, firing them only when they had no choice. And, on this day in 1978, Ohio State was left with no choice.
There really wasn't anything special about the 1978 Gator Bowl. It was the first time — and, until Clemson and Ohio State meet in Friday night's Orange Bowl, the only time — the schools faced off in football.
But the game set no records for scoring or anything else, as I recall. It is remembered only for Hayes' punch.
Yesterday, after I heard that Jim Tressel had resigned as the head football coach at Ohio State, I sent an e–mail to a friend of mine.
"Did you hear that Jim Tressel has resigned at Ohio State?" I asked.
"It had been building for some time after that stupid bowl decision," he replied. "Probably good for both the school and him. He'll get a job next year very easily at a top program."
I completely agree with his first sentence — and I agree with the second as well. I'm not so sure about the third. I'm kind of inclined to think this is it for Tressel — or that it may be a few years — possibly several years — before he returns to the sidelines.
It's hard for me to say, though. Tressel's decision really caught me by surprise — although, in hindsight, my friend's observation that this "had been building for some time" makes sense — and it may take me awhile to absorb it all.
Others don't seem as surprised.
Brett McMurphy of CBS Sports, for one, wants to know — What took so long?
"Any other coach would have been tossed aside months ago," he writes. "Tressel must have attended — and graduated cum laude from — the Richard M. Nixon School on how to handle a crisis situation. Yet another example: The coverup is worse than the crime."
That helps frame things for me. Tressel does remind me of Nixon in his determination never to admit to wrongdoing. Even his "defense" of his players' violations of NCAA rules against selling memorabilia — that these problems could be avoided if athletes were paid — smacks of the kind of arrogance I have come to expect from Ohio State coaches.
Which brings me to Mike Lopresti of USA Today, who put into words a thought that kept going through my mind.
For reasons I had not been able to pinpoint previously, Tressel's sudden departure reminded me of the demise of another legendary Ohio State football coach, Woody Hayes, who belted an opposing player following a turnover in a bowl game.
They were "[t]wo smart, determined, successful coaches [who] came to messy ends, each from [a] self–induced crisis."
Hayes was arrogant, too — in a different way, perhaps. But each in his own way believed that he and the Ohio State football program occupied a special zone. In that zone, Hayes was entitled to fetch a roundhouse to the chops of an opposing player on national TV, and Tressel was entitled to look the other way while his players ignored the rules by which all others must live.
("If the president does it," Nixon famously said, "that means it is not illegal.")
Nevertheless, Tressel was maybe the only thing sports fans in Ohio had going for them these days. Lebron James left Cleveland for Miami — where he will start playing for an NBA title tonight.
The Cleveland Indians are clinging to first in a pitiful American League Central, but they got hammered the day Tressel announced his resignation, and it is far from certain whether they will still be playing in October.
The Cincinnati Reds, thought by many to be a sure thing for the playoffs when the season began, are in a tailspin; they've lost seven of their last 10 games, and they are currently third in the National League Central.
And probably the less said about the Browns and the Bengals the better.
Tressel's status among suddenly embattled (and presumably embittered) Ohio sports fans may improve. After all, by the time he died, Hayes was remembered for his triumphs on the gridiron and not his indiscretion in the Gator Bowl.
And Nixon, too, was eulogized in glowing terms — nearly two decades after he resigned the presidency.
Time does have a way of healing all — or, at least, most — wounds.
The Sugar Bowl was played last night. My alma mater, the University of Arkansas, came up five points short.
I am reminded of what Adlai Stevenson said in his concession speech on Election Night 1952 (he was actually quoting a story that had been told by Abraham Lincoln about a century earlier): "It hurts too much to laugh, but I'm too old to cry."
Up to that point, though, it was a marvelous comeback, the kind of thing that no doubt would have achieved legendary status in my home state if it had led to a victory. And who knows? It may yet achieve a kind of mythical status, a sort of a David–vs.–Goliath thing — but without the inspirational underdog–overcomes–all–obstacles theme.
If the Razorbacks had managed to pull off an astonishing comeback, no doubt the folks in Arkansas would have spoken of it in the same hushed tones they reserve for the 1978 Orange Bowl, when Lou Holtz suspended three of his stars only days before a game with already–heavily favored Oklahoma, then went out and beat the Sooners, 31–6, behind a sophomore running back.
Or the 1965 Cotton Bowl, when Frank Broyles led Arkansas to a 10–7 victory over Nebraska and a share of the national championship with Bear Bryant and Alabama. No suspensions in that one, just names of Razorback proteges like Jerry Jones, Jimmy Johnson and Ken Hatfield and assistants like Johnny Majors and Barry Switzer who went on to influence both college and pro ball.
Broyles and Holtz capped 11–win seasons with those victories. Arkansas' current coach, Bobby Petrino, could have become the third coach in school history to win 11 games in a season if the Razorbacks had managed to beat Ohio State.
Even though the Razorbacks did not achieve a comeback for the ages, I think this game will be talked about for awhile.
They were allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl, however — and, between them, they accounted for or made significant contributions to each of Ohio State's four touchdowns.
If Ken Gordon of the Columbus Dispatch is indicative of how garden–variety Buckeye fans feel, though, NCAA violations mean nothing — in January, at least. We'll see how they feel in about eight or nine months.
(The Ohio State coach insists that the players all promised they would return for their senior years and serve their suspensions as a condition for being allowed to participate in the Sugar Bowl, but, Coach Pollyanna notwithstanding, I'll withhold judgment until after the draft in the spring, thank you.)
"Whether their next game for Ohio State is in eight months, nine months or never again, the Suspended Five gave their school a tremendous parting gift last night," Gordon wrote. "And one of the most obscure of the group came up with the biggest play."
That would be Solomon Thomas, whose late interception snuffed out Arkansas' last hope of winning the game.
Denied victory by five players who really shouldn't have been permitted to play — and may wind up having the last laugh — the Razorbacks may have to content themselves with the knowledge that they came closer to winning the Sugar Bowl than any losing team since #8 Georgia lost to #11 West Virginia, 38–35, on Jan. 2, 2006.
The Ohio State Five committed no grievous offenses during the game. It was cleanly played and won. There were no bad calls upon which the outcome could be blamed. There were no serious injuries that kept anyone from starting.
It was an entertaining game, although not in the sense that momentum shifted with each possession. Ohio State won the first half. Arkansas won the second, but by a smaller margin. Consequently, Ohio State won.
It would be tempting to suggest that the better team won. And maybe, when one evaluates the talent that each school brought to the Louisiana Superdome last night, that is so.
But it's a matter of opinion whether all the talent on the field was there legitimately. The NCAA will tell you that all of Ohio State's players were, in fact, eligible to be there — and, by existing NCAA rules, that is probably so.
I still think it is wrong, though, for a punishment to be assessed in the next season, and I don't feel the Ohio State Five should have been allowed to play. But they were and they played honorably.
We shall see if they are as honorable about serving their suspensions.
When they meet the Ohio State Buckeyes in the Big Easy on Tuesday night, though, it will be hard to tell — judging from their histories in New Orleans — which team wants or needs to change its luck there more.
As I mentioned a few weeks ago, the Razorbacks have one victory in five appearances in the Sugar Bowl. The Buckeyes also have one victory, but they have only made three appearances in New Orleans.
And they've been to New Orleans much more recently.
In fact, their most recent trip there was a success.
On New Year's Day 1999, the third–ranked Buckeyes took on the eighth–ranked Texas A&M Aggies in the Superdome, and the Aggies drew first blood, driving 59 yards in six plays against the nation's second–best defense.
But Ohio State scored three touchdowns before the first period was over. The backbreaker was a blocked punt that the Buckeyes recovered and quickly converted into an unchallenged score.
The Ohio State offense didn't play particularly well in the second half, but the defense lived up to its reputation and stopped every A&M threat except one. Ohio State prevailed, 24–14.
It was the polar opposite of the Buckeyes' experience the previous year, when fifth–ranked Florida State raced to a 21–3 halftime lead after a fairly competitive first quarter.
Ninth–ranked Ohio State's offense just never got on track, and the Buckeyes lost by a wide margin, 31–14.
But that beating wasn't as severe as the one inflicted on Ohio State when Woody Hayes took the Buckeyes to New Orleans for the first time 20 years earlier.
On Jan. 2, 1978, third–ranked Alabama, led by Bear Bryant, hammered ninth–ranked Ohio State, 35–6.
The Razorbacks don't have a history of success in the Sugar Bowl. With a record of 1–4, Arkansas fans cannot plausibly argue otherwise.
Did you ever see the movie "Broadcast News" with William Hurt, Holly Hunter and Albert Brooks?
Do you remember the scene where Brooks is on the phone at home, feeding information to Hunter, who, in turn, is feeding that information to Hurt, who says it on camera?
Brooks watches this play out on his TV screen and says, "I say it here, it comes out there."
These Ohio State football players are all juniors, and they could choose to skip their senior years, thus avoiding having to pay any penalty for violating NCAA rules.
It's the best of both worlds — playing in a BCS bowl, then not having to be held accountable for NCAA rules violations. Talk about having your cake and eating it, too.
Tressel said he told the players they would have to make their intentions known to him before the team left for New Orleans. The team is now in New Orleans waiting the start of Tuesday night's game.
"Tressel said he told the five they 'have to make any decision based on the future and (leaving early for the) NFL prior to us leaving for our bowl game. It wouldn't be fair if someone was able to participate' and then leave."
I'm not the first person to suggest that some or all of these players might play in the Sugar Bowl, then decide to skip their senior years and avoid paying any kind of penalty.
And I'm skeptical, to say the least, about all of this. Beyond cautioning the players that it "wouldn't be fair" for them to play in the Sugar Bowl and then skip town, I'm not sure Tressel will be in any position to do much if a player goes back on his word once the game is over.
I mean, it's not as if the players made a commitment on paper — like a scholarship.
Roland Sales led Arkansas to an 11–win season with an Orange Bowl victory over the University of Oklahoma on Jan. 2, 1978.
Next Tuesday night, my alma mater, the University of Arkansas, will face Ohio State University in the Sugar Bowl.
To say this is a big deal for me, for all the folks I knew growing up in Arkansas, for the school and for the state would be an understatement.
With a 10–2 record, the Razorbacks have finished the season with 10 wins for only the second time in the last two decades. If they win next week, they will have 11 victories in one season for the first time since 1977, when Arkansas went 11–1 and recorded an upset victory over Oklahoma in the 1978 Orange Bowl.
The only game the Razorbacks lost that year was to Texas and eventual Heisman Trophy winner Earl Campbell.
I remember that Orange Bowl. It was an amazing start to what turned out to be — in my opinion — a mediocre year.
All the years I was growing up there, Arkansas fans seemed to crave national recognition, national respect. They were sort of the Rodney Dangerfields of college sports fans. Being invited to play the Sooners was, in their eyes, an indication that Arkansas finally was getting that respect.
But then, a few days before the Orange Bowl, first–year Arkansas coach Lou Holtz suspended three of Arkansas' best players for unspecified team rules violations.
I've never seen an optimistic mood deflate so quickly. Almost instantly, everyone in Arkansas became convinced that the Sooners would pound the Razorbacks to a pulp in the Orange Bowl.
I don't think Holtz's action changed how people outside of Arkansas viewed the matchup very much. Everyone seemed to assume from the beginning that Oklahoma would win.
The folks in Las Vegas had made OU the heavy favorite even before Holtz suspended the players; after Holtz did that, the oddsmakers in Vegas refused to take any more bets on the Orange Bowl. They thought it was a foregone conclusion that OU would win. Just about everyone did.
But, then, do you know what happened? A miracle happened!
A previously unknown sophomore running back named Roland Sales stepped up, set an Orange Bowl record for rushing yards and led Arkansas to a 31–6 victory over Oklahoma.
Now, as we get closer to what may be the biggest bowl game in which Arkansas has played since that Orange Bowl in the late 1970s, I'm getting sort of a sense of deja vu.
All five players will be eligible to play in New Orleans next week.
Something about how it is an established NCAA policy to treat postseason games differently than regularly scheduled games.
I'm not sure that's right, though. I mean, depriving these players of facing Akron and four other teams next fall is a greater punishment than preventing them from playing on a national stage in the Sugar Bowl?
I'm sorry, but I just can't follow that logic.
All those players are juniors so, depending upon how many of the players declare themselves eligible for the NFL draft in the spring, it is possible that none of them will ever have to pay any sort of penalty for apparently violating NCAA rules.
What sort of message does that send to those who follow in their footsteps? I'm just spitballing here, but it might tell young people that, no matter what kind of mess you find yourself in, there is always a loophole.
I don't think that is the kind of message the NCAA wants to send to student–athletes — because that definitely is not the way the real world operates.
Of course, maybe that is the way things are in the rarified atmosphere of athletics. Loopholes, after all, exist primarily for the privileged. And there may be no more privileged group in America than professional athletes.
Actually, skipping their senior years might not be a bad idea for most of those Buckeyes. It isn't hard for me to see them looking at the balance sheet and seeing jumping to the NFL early as a plausible solution; instead of sitting out the first half of their senior seasons, they could just go ahead and try their luck in the pros.
One player is the team's top rusher. Another is the team's second–best receiver, but neither might be where they are if not for the exploits of quarterback Terrelle Pryor (who was mentioned as a Heisman prospect when the season began and also happens to be one of the suspendees).
Facing the uncertainty of Pryor's plans, his suspended teammates may figure that bad publicity is better than no publicity — especially if they remember how far Texas fell this season after Colt McCoy's collegiate career ended. There are four other quarterbacks on Ohio State's roster (three are freshmen), but Pryor threw all but 25 of the team's 323 passes this season.
If Pryor leaves, there won't be much experience at the position, and that wouldn't be likely to give his suspended teammates much in the way of recent highlights. Now may be the time for those players to cash in on their success.
As an Arkansas alumnus and a lifelong Razorback fan, I'd really prefer that the Hogs face — and defeat — the Buckeyes at full strength. But I wonder if there isn't a more important principle at stake here.
All things considered, declaring for the draft could be, as I say, the most prudent choice for the others, but it might not be the answer for Pryor, who just isn't ready for prime time but may be left with no choice but to jump instead of twiddling his thumbs, according to Pat McManamon of the Fanhouse.
But if he stays, the experience level at quarterback won't be very high in Ohio State's first five games next year. Fortunately for the Buckeyes, the majority of those games aren't with top–flight competition, and all but one will be played at home.
There are some trouble spots, though. The road game will be played in the middle of the suspension — Ohio State has to travel to Miami on Sept. 17 to play the Hurricanes. And the final game of the suspension is at home against Michigan State, currently ranked seventh in the nation and co–Big Ten champ this year.
(In case you were wondering, the Buckeyes beat Miami this year, 36–24; they last lost to the Hurricanes in the 1999 Kickoff Classic. And Ohio State has a seven–game winning streak against Michigan State, with the Buckeyes' last loss to the Spartans also coming in 1999.)
Then, those players who stay for their senior years and serve the five–game suspensions will return to the field on Oct. 8, when they must travel to Lincoln, Neb., to face the Cornhuskers.
All of that is very superficial, though. It's more of that Tiger Woods–LeBron James–Brett Favre "it's all about me" thinking that seems to permeate sports today — and tends to irritate all but the athlete's dedicated fans.
Well, there's so much money in sports now. I guess athletes — and their agents — have no choice but to think in terms of how the intangibles will affect them.
In recent years, after all, I have watched the annual NFL draft and I have heard analysts speak of how much dropping a slot or two in the draft can cost an athlete when it comes time to sign the contract.
And "cost," in this case, tends to be measured in the millions of dollars.
Financially, there is a lot at stake, and I guess you can't be too hard on a kid who is only following the example set by others.
"Maybe it's coincidence, maybe not, but Pryor's mentor and role model is LeBron James," McManamon writes. "And James was driving a Hummer when he was a high school senior — a Hummer acquired, mind you, through what was determined to be a legitimate loan to his mother.
"No doubt," he continued with more than a dash of sarcasm, "the guy would have loaned the same money to a standout history student."
(McManamon went on to observe that "James this week sold sponsorships to his birthday party — for $10,000.")
But I would argue that there is also a lot at stake as far as integrity is concerned.
I guess I'm what you might call old school when it comes to something like this. I'm not apologizing for that. I'm simply stating a fact.
I was brought up to believe that attaining a higher education was a goal to be aimed for. If you were given a scholarship — be it athletic or academic — it was a contract, and you were obligated to fulfill the commitment you had made.
True, I guess everyone who goes to college sees it as a means to an end. A college degree, we are told, is a ticket to a better life. (It doesn't always work out that way, but that's the general idea.) Consequently, people invest the time to earn a degree because they believe it will make certain things possible.
Not everyone has the fame and fortune of a professional athlete's career waiting for them after graduation. Even some athletes who excelled in college don't make it on the professional level.
Pryor probably will. But he is also mindful of his collegiate legacy, and John Kampf of the Cleveland News–Herald says this isn't the kind Pryor wants to leave behind.
"Earlier this season," Kampf writes, "when explaining why he was planning on returning to Ohio State for his senior season, the Buckeyes' junior quarterback talked about leaving a legacy at Ohio State and that he wasn't leaving 'until all the records are broken.'
"Unfortunately for him, the most notable record he and a handful of teammates have set is the longest suspension for the most amount of merchandise sold."
If Pryor stays, he will miss the first five games of his senior year. It is highly unlikely that he will win the Heisman on the basis of his performances in half a dozen regular–season games, no matter how remarkable they may be. It is also unlikely that he will break all the career records for quarterbacks at OSU.
And, if his teammates stumble once or twice during his absence, he may never have the chance to play for a national title.
So Pryor's game against Arkansas may well be his last opportunity to make an impression. In fact, it might be his farewell collegiate appearance. Or will it?
I say "media event" because you couldn't call it a press conference. Folks from the media were there, but they weren't allowed to ask any questions.
Without any questions, the statements sounded managed, self serving. That makes it hard to assess the candor level. I'm guessing it will be hard for NFL executives to assess it as well.
For what it's worth, though, it wasn't hard for me to come to one conclusion based on those brief statements.
"I didn't mean to hurt nobody," Pryor said.
If Pryor really is concerned about his legacy, it wouldn't hurt to return for his senior year — and publicly proclaim his intention to do so. He could be a positive role model in a couple of ways — by honoring his commitment to finish his work on his degree and by taking his medicine for his mistakes.
Even if his football game doesn't improve appreciably, the additional year in school could only help.
Maybe he would learn what a double negative is — and how to avoid being one.
In their long history, the Arkansas Razorbacks have never played Ohio State in a football game.
For that matter, the Razorbacks have seldom played in the Sugar Bowl.
But both will happen on January 4.
I know the game will not be played for a national championship. That will be between Auburn and Oregon nearly a week later.
And it probably isn't the most intriguing of the remaining postseason games. That distinction, I think, has to go to the Rose Bowl, where 11–1 Wisconsin will take on 12–0 TCU.
But I really do believe the Sugar Bowl between the 10–2 Razorbacks and the 11–1 Buckeyes is next on the list.
I just hope the Hogs can win the game. The Sugar Bowl hasn't been a very sweet experience for them in the past.
Neither, for that matter, have the Hogs' encounters with teams from the Big Ten. Ohio State will be the fourth Big Ten team Arkansas has faced in a bowl since the 1998 season, and Arkansas lost to the other three (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin).
When you factor in the Razorbacks' 1–2 regular–season mark against Big Ten teams, Arkansas' overall record against the conference is 1–5. Not terribly impressive.
John Tamanaha of NBC Sports doesn't think the Hogs will beat Ohio State, either, but he does think they will beat the 2½–point spread.
I guess both teams have a lot to prove.
The Buckeyes, writes the Associated Press, are "tired of hearing how their predecessors have lost all nine bowl meetings with teams from the Southeastern Conference."That's a skid that dates back to the days of Woody Hayes. Through most of his career at Ohio State, Hayes was bound by Big Ten rules. Only the conference champion could play in a bowl game, the Rose Bowl. Everyone else had to stay home.
Many years, that meant that some pretty decent teams, teams that were capable of competing for a national title, stayed home during the postseason, often because they could not defeat Ohio State.
But conference rules changed and, in his final years with the Buckeyes, Hayes could accept invitations to play in other bowls if Ohio State did not go to Pasadena. And, in January 1978, Hayes' Buckeyes lost the Sugar Bowl to Bear Bryant's Alabama team.
The other eight bowl losses to the SEC came under other coaches. Hayes was forced into retirement late that year when he struck an opposing player in the 1978 Gator Bowl.
It still strikes me as odd to hear Arkansas mentioned as a Southeastern Conference team. All five of their previous Sugar Bowl opponents were from the Southeastern Conference
When I was growing up in Arkansas, a berth in the Cotton Bowl was the reward for winning the Southwest Conference — which is where Arkansas played until the early 1990s — so that clearly was the objective that Frank Broyles and the Razorbacks aimed for when each season began.
The Cotton Bowl game seldom means anything anymore, but old habits die hard, I guess. If the Hogs can't play in a BCS bowl (and this will be the first time since the introduction of the BCS more than a decade ago that Arkansas has been in a BCS bowl), I want them to come to Dallas and play in the Cotton Bowl.
But, although Broyles won nearly 70% of all the games he coached in at Arkansas, he led the Razorbacks to as many Sugar Bowls as he did Cotton Bowls.
In the 1960s, the Hogs played in four Sugar Bowls and lost three.
Arkansas' first appearance in the Sugar Bowl came on New Year's Day 1962 when the Razorbacks faced Alabama.
The Razorbacks were 8–2 and ranked ninth in the nation. Alabama was 10–0 and ranked #1.
It was a low–scoring contest, with Alabama getting all 10 of its points in the first half and Arkansas getting its lone field goal in the third quarter.
A 10–3 final score may seem odd to people who look at the box score of that game from the perspective of 2010, when high–scoring offenses have led the Tigers and Ducks to the brink of college football supremacy and defense almost seems to be an afterthought. But the Razorback defense entered that game third in the nation against the pass and 10th in the nation overall.
And Bryant's defense did a great job of protecting that lead in the final quarter.
Only three of the Hogs' regular–season foes scored more than 10 points against them in 1961, but Bryant claimed his first national title with the 10 points his Crimson Tide scored on Arkansas that day.
The Razorbacks were back in New Orleans the next year, this time to face third–ranked Ole Miss (9–0). The Razorbacks were ranked sixth and entered the game with a 9–1 record.
Another defensive battle ensued, with Ole Miss prevailing, 17–13. The Rebels, coached by the legendary Johnny Vaught, took a 10–3 halftime lead, then held on while Arkansas outscored Ole Miss in the third quarter, 10–7.
The fourth quarter of that year's Sugar Bowl, like the one the year before, was scoreless.
Arkansas did not return to New Orleans for another Sugar Bowl for six years.
On Jan. 1, 1969, the Razorbacks, ranked ninth in the nation and coming off a 9–1 season, met the Georgia Bulldogs, who were fourth in the nation with an 8–0–2 mark.
This time, the Razorbacks won the game, but, once again, it was a defensive battle. Given Arkansas' history in New Orleans, that was probably to be expected. Georgia's defense was #1 in the nation.
But Arkansas' defense, which was much more prone to giving up points than the first two teams Broyles took to the Sugar Bowl, got the better of things. The Georgia defense provided the Bulldogs' only score — a second–quarter safety.
Meanwhile, the Arkansas offense — led by Chuck Dicus' 12 receptions — scored 16 points and won the game, 16–2.
The Razorbacks returned to New Orleans the next year.
The Sugar Bowl was still a prestigious bowl game, but it had the feeling of a consolation bowl for the Razorbacks and their fans. If they had beaten Texas in the "Game of the Century" in December 1969, they would have gone on to play for the national title in the Cotton Bowl.
But they lost that game by a single point and had to face Ole Miss, with Archie Manning at quarterback, instead.
In the aftermath of that classic Arkansas–Texas game, wrote Jim Bailey and Orville Henry in "The Razorbacks," the history of Razorback football, "[a]ll the accolades you could imagine fell on both teams, but nothing could change the fact that Texas was going to the Cotton Bowl to play Notre Dame for the final No. 1 prize, and Arkansas was going to the Sugar Bowl to play Ole Miss for nothing, compared to what they had just lost."
My memory of the game is that Arkansas (9–1 and ranked third after the loss to Texas) made ghastly mistakes — Bill McClard, who was at that time the best kicker ever to play for the Hogs, missed field goals, and the offense failed on a two–point conversion attempt and turned the ball over in some critical situations — while Ole Miss (7–3 and ranked 13th) played essentially turnover–free football.
That tends to win against just about everyone, and it won against Arkansas that day.
And Broyles, who will be 86 the day after Christmas, never coached in a Sugar Bowl again.
But he returned as the Arkansas athletic director when his successor as coach, Lou Holtz, brought the Razorbacks to New Orleans for their first (and, until next month, their only) Sugar Bowl appearance in New Orleans' Superdome.
All four of Broyles' Sugar Bowl appearances had been at Tulane Stadium.
And for the fourth time in five Sugar Bowls, the Razorbacks went down to defeat, this time by the biggest margin yet.
The Hogs came into the game with a 10–1 record (ranked sixth in the AP poll, seventh in the coaches' poll), but they were no match for unbeaten Alabama (ranked second by AP, first by the coaches). Alabama sprinted to a 17–3 halftime lead.
I was a student at the University of Arkansas at the time, and I remember watching the game on my TV in Fayetteville, yelling at the screen, "Throw it to Farrell!" In case you're unaware, Robert Farrell was Arkansas' star receiver.
Alabama's defense kept Farrell bottled up for most of the game (he only caught three passes all day), but Arkansas QB Kevin Scanlon finally found him for a touchdown in the third quarter.
At the time, the score cut the deficit to 17–9, but Alabama scored an insurance touchdown in the fourth quarter and won the game, 24–9.
The Hogs haven't been back to New Orleans to play in the Sugar Bowl in the 30 years since.
Maybe that's enough time for their luck to change. I hope so.
Forty years ago tomorrow, Bo Schembechler concluded his first regular season as head coach at Michigan with a 24–12 victory over top–ranked Ohio State that sent the Wolverines to Pasadena, Calif., for a Rose Bowl date with USC. The loss ended a 22–game winning streak for the Buckeyes.
The Wolverines lost that New Year's Day game, but the win over Ohio State was the first shot fired in what became known as the "Ten–Year War" between the schools. Ohio State and Michigan dominated the Big Ten in the 1970s. No other school represented the conference in the Rose Bowl in that decade.
Without a doubt, Michigan fans would have liked to have seen a repeat of that outcome on this, the eve of the 40th anniversary of Schembechler's landmark victory, especially since "The Game," as it is known, was being played in Ann Arbor, where Schembechler recorded that triumph. But it was not to be.
Ohio State already was assured of a berth in this season's Rose Bowl, although the Buckeyes' opponent has yet to be determined. Michigan, meanwhle, needed a victory simply to be bowl eligible. The Buckeyes won, 21–10, ending Michigan's football season and spoiling the occasion for Wolverines fans.
"I wasn't sure before, but on Friday, I'll vote Texas No. 1 because I believe this is the best team in the country," Brown, a voter in the coaches' poll, proclaimed.
Kirk Bohls of the Austin American-Statesman agrees that Texas looked like a champion. However, "[i]n all likelihood, the Florida-Oklahoma winner in Thursday's BCS title game will take home the big prize unless unbeaten Utah's longshot campaign takes hold. But Texas deserves to be in the conversation about No. 1."
This is utter nonsense.
Not to take anything away from the season the Longhorns have had. But if Brown votes for Texas, he will be in violation of the agreement that the voters in the coaches' poll will support the winner of what is designated as the BCS national title game.
In the pre-BCS days, Brown could do that with a reasonable expectation of getting additional support from his colleagues.
But today it amounts to little more than a quixotic gesture — and one that could cost Brown his voting privileges in future polls.
Things could get interesting, though, if Oklahoma beats Florida. If that happens, Texas can claim to be deserving of the national title because the Longhorns were the only team to beat the Sooners.
But, if Florida wins the game, what would be Brown's justification? The Longhorns didn't play the Gators this season, so any claim to be the better team would be purely hypothetical. And Florida would have back-to-back victories over Alabama and Oklahoma to its credit.
No offense to Ohio State intended, but the Buckeyes have now lost three consecutive bowls — including two BCS title games.
When they look at the Buckeyes these days, college football observers don't see the team that beat Miami in double overtime to claim the national title for the 2002-03 season.
They see a team that has a reputation now — fairly or unfairly — for being unable to win in January.
A win over Ohio State simply doesn't impress people the way Brown may think it should.
Even so, the Longhorns are positioned well for 2009.
Richard Justice of the Houston Chronicle points out that Texas will have nine offensive starters and six defensive starters returning and "might well be the preseason No. 1 team in the country."
But Texas will have to settle for the potential for greatness next season — and concede this year's national title to the winner of Thursday night's game.
Even if that turns out to be the hated Sooners.
Mike Freeman of CBS Sports may have said it best when he wrote that Texas "choked away a long shot at history" by claiming a "lucky" victory over an "average team whose claim to fame now is beating Michigan" — an achievement that wasn't too remarkable, given the fact that Michigan, with its 3-9 record, had its first losing season in more than 40 years.
Brown will have to be gracious this time — and abide by the coaches' agreement to support the winner of the BCS title game.
In the BCS' present arrangement, four of the "traditional" bowl games and a national championship game are labeled "BCS bowls" — in what passes for a playoff series — although only the top two teams in the BCS rankings at the end of the season compete for the national title.
This season, the finalists are Florida and Oklahoma. They will face each other in Miami on Jan. 8.
I broke down that matchup (to a degree) the other day and I'll have more to say about it in the coming weeks.
Today, I would like to evaluate the other four games.
Fiesta Bowl Monday, Jan. 5 8 p.m. (EST), FOX
Texas (11-1, #3 in BCS) vs. Ohio State (10-2, #10 in BCS) — Some pro-Texas theorists have been coming up with wildly improbable scenarios that will bend the time/space continuum until it snaps like a dry twig.
In reality, though, the best Texas can hope for is to beat Ohio State and finish the season second behind either Florida or Oklahoma.
The Buckeyes and the Longhorns should be fairly familiar foes. They faced each other in high-profile nonconference games in 2005 and 2006. Texas won the first meeting, 25-22, and Ohio State won the second, 24-7.
Here's how they compare offensively:
Texas is 11th in the nation in passing yards per game. Ohio State ranks 104th.
But Ohio State, behind the running of Chris Wells, has the statistical edge in rushing yards. The Buckeyes are 28th. The Longhorns are 34th.
In points per game, there's no comparison. Texas is fifth in the nation, averaging 43.9 points per game. Ohio State is 45th, averaging 28.2 points per game.
Well, we knew Texas was putting up some good numbers on offense.
On the defensive side of the ball,
Both teams have done a pretty good job of keeping opponents from scoring, but Ohio State has the advantage. The Buckeyes are seventh in the country, giving up an average of 13.1 points per game. The Longhorns are 21st in the nation, allowing 18.6 points per game.
The Texas defense is ranked second in the nation in rushing defense, which is bad news for the Ohio State offense. The Buckeyes' run defense is pretty good, too, with a national ranking of 20th.
Ohio State's pass defense (with Kurt Coleman, tied for 35th in the country in interceptions) is ranked sixth in the nation, which is bad news for the Texas offense and Colt McCoy. Texas' pass defense is 110th in the country — which is comparable to the OSU pass offense.
Total defense belongs to Ohio State. The Buckeyes are ranked eighth in the country. The Longhorns are ranked 50th.
If Texas plays like it did when it still had hope of playing in the Big 12 title game, I think the Longhorns can handle the Buckeyes.
But, if Texas can't shake off the disappointment of not being in the national championship game, I think Ohio State can win the game.
The schools played no common opponents.
Orange Bowl Thursday, Jan. 1 8 p.m. (EST), FOX
Cincinnati (11-2, #12 in BCS) vs. Virginia Tech (9-4, #19 in BCS) — The last time the schools met was two years ago, in September 2006. Virginia Tech won, 29-13.
From a TV ratings perspective, the game has very little to recommend it — certainly not when compared to the Florida-Oklahoma blockbuster that will be played in Miami a week later. But it will have the evening time slot to itself. The Orange Bowl will be the only game being played on New Year's Night.
How do they match up?
Cincinnati is ranked 24th in the country in passing yardage (with Tony Pike, who is 29th in the nation in passing efficiency). Virginia Tech is 112th.
But Tech has the edge in rushing yardage. Tech ranks 42nd. Cincinnati is 94th.
Neither team has been lighting up the scoreboard. Cincinnati is 51st in points per game. Tech is 89th.
Something tells me not to expect a high-scoring affair, although you never know. Cincinnati's Mardy Gilyard is 18th in the nation in all-purpose yardage.
On defense,
Virginia Tech is 13th in the nation in points allowed per game. Cincinnati isn't bad, ranked 27th.
Both teams enjoyed success stopping the run this season. Cincinnati ranks 13th in run defense. Virginia Tech ranks 19th.
Virginia Tech is 15th in the nation in defending against the pass, thanks in part to Victor Harris, who tied for fifth in the nation in interceptions. Cincinnati is 68th.
Virginia Tech is seventh in the nation in total defense. Cincinnati is 26th.
Virginia Tech's fate may depend upon how well the pass defense can stop Pike.
The schools played no common opponents this year, although one of Cincinnati's losses was to Oklahoma in September.
Michigan beat Stanford in the first Rose Bowl, 49-0.
Rose Bowl Thursday, Jan. 1 5 p.m. (EST), ABC
Penn State (11-1, #8 in BCS) vs. USC (11-1, #5 in BCS) — This will be the second time that USC and Penn State have faced each other in the Rose Bowl. The first time they played was on Jan. 1, 1923, in the official dedication of the Rose Bowl stadium.
The two schools took on two common opponents during the 2008 regular season. One was Oregon State. Penn State won its game with OSU easily, 45-14, in early September, but three weeks later, OSU beat USC, 27-21.
The other common opponent was a high-profile foe that both Penn State and USC defeated — Ohio State. USC beat the Buckeyes, 35-3, and Penn State won, 13-6.
On offense,
USC ranks 31st in in passing yardage (with Mark Sanchez ranked 13th in passing efficiency). Penn State ranks 35th (with Daryll Clark ranked 23rd in passing efficiency).
It's even closer in rushing yardage. Penn State ranks 15th (led by Evan Royster, who rates 25th in rushing). USC ranks 17th.
The teams have put up comparable numbers when it comes to scoring — reflecting, I suppose, how close they were to each other in rushing and passing. Penn State is 11th in points per game. USC is 14th.
With two teams that rank in the top 15 in points per game, I'd expect to see a lot of scoring in Pasadena.
Who has the edge in defense?
Well, numerically, the edge belongs to USC, the #1 team in the nation in many defensive categories. But Penn State has had a pretty solid year in defense as well.
USC was the stingiest team in the nation when it came to giving up points. The Trojans allowed only 7.8 points per game. But Penn State was fourth in the nation, allowing only 12.4 points per game.
USC has a narrow edge in rushing defense. The Trojans are ranked fifth. The Nittany Lions are ranked eighth.
Perhaps the most distinct defensive advantage belongs to USC in the category of pass defense. USC ranks first in the nation while Penn State is 12th.
And USC is first in the nation in total defense. Penn State is fifth.
Both conferences are considered lacking when compared to the Big 12 and the Southeastern conferences, but these two teams seem to be well matched and could provide the most competitive of the major bowls.
Sugar Bowl Friday, Jan. 2 8 p.m. (EST), FOX
Alabama (12-1, #4 in BCS) vs. Utah (12-0, #6 in BCS) — If you're not a fan of the passing game, this might be the game for you.
In passing offense, Utah ranks 41st (even so, Brian Johnson ranks 18th in passing efficiency). Alabama ranks 96th.
In rushing offense, Alabama is 23rd (Glen Coffee is 21st in the country in rushing). Utah is 41st.
In points per game, Utah is 15th. Alabama is 30th.
On defense, both teams rank pretty highly, although I think that probably means more in Alabama's case than Utah's.
The Southeastern Conference is simply superior to the Mountain West.
In points allowed per game, Alabama is sixth. Utah is 12th.
In rushing defense, Alabama is fourth in the nation. Utah is 14th.
In pass defense, Alabama is 21st (Rashad Johnson shares 31st in interceptions). Utah is 40th (but Sean Smith is tied for 21st in interceptions).
And in total defense, Alabama is third. Utah is 18th.
A "tomato can" is a fighter who is believed to be past his prime and an "easy" or "guaranteed" win for an up-and-coming fighter who wants to pad his record.
Sometimes, though, the "tomato can" doesn't cooperate. For example, in 1990, undefeated heavyweight champion Mike Tyson lost the title to a 42-to-1 underdog named Buster Douglas.
Another heavyweight champion, Muhammad Ali, almost lost his title to lightly regarded Chuck Wepner in 1975. Wepner nearly went the distance against Ali and inspired the original "Rocky" movie.
I got my bachelor's degree in journalism from the University of Arkansas, and I got my master's degree in journalism from the University of North Texas. Most of my adult life has been dedicated to writing and editing in one form or another. Most recently I have taught writing (news and developmental) as an adjunct journalism professor at Richland College, where I advise the student newspaper staff. Go, Thunderducks!
