Daily Archives: June 1, 2016

Today, in words fail me…

Ken Starr, for the win.

Baylor thinks it’s a good idea to let this man stay on campus and teach.

Advertisements

41 Comments

Filed under It's All Just Made Up And Flagellant

“I think we do the best we can.”

Hey, Booch and Dan, I think this guy’s talking to you.

“If there’s any message these coaches should take out of Baylor, it’s that their self-absorbed way of looking at their sport because they can put 100,000 people into the stadium is a liability to the institution if they do not look at their students the same way that admissions looks at all students,” McPherson said.

But, they got this rule now, boss!  That makes all the difference.  Ummm…

The SEC transfer rule provides cover as much for the coach who kicks out a player as it does for the new coach who would have signed him, McPherson said. In other words, a coach can get protected by kicking out a player for misconduct without fans getting upset because the player goes on to another SEC school.

Ouchy, but true.  Even better, Saban won’t ever have to embarrass himself with a Jonathan Taylor-type signing again.  That Greg Sankey’s a genius, man.

2 Comments

Filed under Crime and Punishment, SEC Football

Still going…

The Nick Chubb will have a normal 2016 season train, that is.

So how many will eclipse 1,000 yards in 2016? I’ll go with an even eight because I think running back duos could eat into individual numbers more this year.

Here’s my list in order of the most likely rushers to get to 1,000 yards:

… 3. Nick Chubb, Georgia: Coming off that devastating knee injury, maybe he’s too high on the list. But consider that in 14 career starts, he’s failed to rush for 100 yards just once — his season-ending game against Tennessee last year. Chubb has 2,294 yards in one and a half seasons of work, so if he’s healthy this fall, 1,000 yards will be a breeze.

All that’s left is for Phil Steele to put Chubb on one of his preseason All-SEC teams and I think we’ll be done.

10 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football

Swan song

It would be nice to go out with a win on Uncle Verne’s last Cocktail Party.

*************************************************************************

UPDATE:  Georgia-Florida isn’t the only game CBS announced it’s broadcasting today.  Here’s the rest.

I sure hope they don’t make Lundquist end his CFB broadcasting career in the Sun Bowl.

10 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football

An early look at SEC win totals

Chip Patterson’s gathered the info from Vegas Insider for the early lines on wins.  Here’s how the SEC looks on June 1:

Team Win Total Prices
Alabama 10 Over +100 Under -120
LSU 10 Over +100 Under -120
Tennessee 9.5 Over +105 Under -125
Georgia 8.5 Over -110 Under -110
Ole Miss 8.5 Over +100 Under -120
Arkansas 7.5 Over -120 Under +100
Florida 7.5 Over -125 Under +105
Auburn 6.5 Over -110 Under -110
Mississippi State 6.5 Over -120 Under +100
Texas A&M 6 Over -120 Under +100
Missouri 5.5 Over -110 Under -110
Kentucky 5 Over -110 Under -110
South Carolina 5 Over -110 Under -110
Vanderbilt 5 Over -110 Under -110

Patterson thinks taking the over on Georgia looks like the best bet on the board.

Before you jump in here one way or another, here are some advanced stats to ponder.  First, Brian Fremeau has his initial stab at 2016 strength of schedule rankings posted and here’s where the SEC teams stand:

  • Auburn – 1st
  • Mississippi State – 2nd
  • Texas A&M – 3rd
  • Ole Miss – 4th
  • Kentucky – 6th
  • Arkansas – 7th
  • Alabama – 8th
  • LSU – 9th
  • Florida – 11th
  • Missouri – 12th
  • Tennessee – 14th
  • South Carolina – 15th
  • Vanderbilt – 21st
  • Georgia – 43rd

Over at Team Speed Kills, David Wunderlich has taken the early S&P+ projections and fashioned what he calls an equivalency list of each SEC team.

What counts as “equivalent teams” is entirely subjective, but the measure I used is being within a touchdown’s worth of points. In the example above, Ole Miss is just outside of being a peer to Alabama. No. 2 LSU, with its S&P+ of 24.4, would be a peer of Alabama (and also of the Rebels, incidentally).

Enough setup. Here is how everything turned out:

TEAM S&P+ RANK S&P+ HIGHEST PEER LOWEST PEER TOTAL PEERS
Alabama 1 26.8 No. 4 Oklahoma 3
LSU 2 24.4 No. 1 Alabama No. 7 Ole Miss 6
Ole Miss 7 18.9 No. 1 Alabama No. 25 Texas A&M 23
Tennessee 9 17.0 No. 4 Oklahoma No. 30 Miami (FL) 25
Georgia 15 16.2 No. 4 Oklahoma No. 34 Texas 30
Arkansas 17 15.2 No. 4 Oklahoma No. 38 Iowa 33
Florida 19 14.5 No. 5 Florida State No. 39 Utah 34
Mississippi State 21 13.6 No. 5 Florida State No. 42 Minnesota 37
Auburn 24 12.5 No. 6 Michigan No. 45 WKU 37
Texas A&M 25 12.5 No. 6 Michigan No. 45 WKU 37
Missouri 47 5.1 No. 26 Nebraska No. 80 Air Force 54
South Carolina 63 2.8 No. 31 TCU No. 90 MTSU 59
Vanderbilt 69 1.8 No. 35 BYU No. 95 Ohio 61
Kentucky 83 -2.4 No. 51 Duke No. 105 Georgia State 54

Respectable projection for the Dawgs there.  Taken together with what, at least at this stage, appears to be a favorable schedule, I’d have to say that Patterson is on to something.  What do you guys think?

13 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, SEC Football, Stats Geek!, What's Bet In Vegas Stays In Vegas

Urnge in the Holy Land

Honestly, I thought my people had better taste.

21 Comments

Filed under Because Nothing Sucks Like A Big Orange, Stylin'

Is the NCAA really considering eliminating signing periods?

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but it strikes me as a rather significant acknowledgement.

Georgia Tech coach Paul Johnson has long been an advocate for a rather radical change to the process of signing recruits to letters of intent –eliminating signing periods and instead allowing prospects to sign at any point when they’ve decided they’re ready to end the recruiting process.

Johnson said at the ACC meetings in early May that he thought that the option was gaining in popularity. He may have known what Division I football oversight committee chairman Bob Bowlsby acknowledged in an interview with the AJC last week – that the committee is looking into it.

“I think a case can be made for that,” Bowlsby said. He called it a “large departure from where we’ve been in the past. Maybe it’s time for consideration of that. I think that there clearly are young people that want to get the process over with. They want to take a visit in the summer and maybe an official visit in the fall and be done with it long before the February signing date. Not everybody agrees with that, but it’s certainly one point of view.”

Now, sure, this is coming from Bowlsby and it may simply be a case of saying something to get a pesky reporter off the phone, but if the NCAA is really doing more than giving lip service to the possibility of canning signing day, that would be a big deal.

Johnson’s rationale for eliminating signing periods is that, beyond giving prospects (and coaches) the chance to be finished with the recruiting process and eliminate the need for “babysitting” prospects after they’ve committed, it would also introduce more transparency to the process of giving commitments and scholarship offers. If a prospect says he wants to attend a particular school but isn’t ready to sign on the spot, then it’s a far clearer indication of his mindset than a commitment, which are often broken at the occasion of a better offer. Likewise, if a coach indicates he’s offering a scholarship but won’t give a prospect the chance to sign, then, the validity of the offer becomes more clear.

“You’ve heard the horror stories of people committed 10 times, and I think that’s not good for the schools, it’s not good for the kids,” Bowlsby said. “We need to figure out how that happens. I think there are some ways in which the student-athletes and their families can stop the recruiting process by making a commitment. Either that, or by actually signing. I think we need to bring as much honesty and transparency to the process as we possibly can.”

As Johnson points out, there really is something in this for both coaches and recruits.  But having Paul Johnson as the public spokesman for the idea lacks a certain pizzazz.  Maybe we could get Harbaugh and Saban to start a Twitter spat over it.

 

12 Comments

Filed under Recruiting, The NCAA