What's Going on in the Big 12?

Ah, parity. It's just the boring way to say "Everything is crazy!"

The South

Remember last week, when Baylor was all alone at the top of the division standings, and we were all like, "Whaaaaaa?" This week restored a little--a little--normality there, with Baylor falling to Oklahoma State on the field and in the standings. Of course, that leaves us with Oklahoma State as the favorite to represent the South in the championship game, which is still pretty weird.

Here's the thing about Baylor: they're better than we're used to them being, but they're still not great. Good for them for winning their entire North slate and a very, very down texas team, but losing to TCU, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State shows that they're not a brand new team.

As for Oklahoma State, I guess it turns out Mike Gundy is a better head coach than head coach/offensive coordinator. And that he made an excellent hire in Dana Holgerson as his new, external OC.

Speaking of great hires! I LOVE TIM DERUYTER, YOU GUYS. I'm not ready to dust off the Wrecking Crew name, but those multiple amazing goal-line stands make my heart go pitter-pat.

Ryan Tannehill has been good too, although frankly I'm relieved he hasn't been so mind-bogglingly good as to drag me into another Aggie QB crush. I've had my heart broken too many times. Too many times.

The team has clearly done better with Tannehill at the wheel than with Jerrod. However, I don't think it's because he's flat-out better than Jerrod. My theory is that Tannehill realizes that his job is to help the team win, whereas Jerrod may have been convinced that he had to carry the team. That in turn made him try too hard and force passes he didn't need to make. (It might be something else, like that the hype went to his head and he stopped working hard in practice, but I hope it's my more generous interpretation.)

As for our collective confusion over how t.u. is so bad, maybe we're overthinking things. It's possible that their weaknesses have been this big, or close to it, and that the weaknesses were just masked by excellent quarterback play. Vince Young and Colt McCoy are not just NFL players, but successful NFL starters. (I know Colt is just a few games in, but he's beaten Drew Brees and Tom Brady already. On a team that won five games last year. That's impressive.)

And then there are OU and Texas Tech, which both quite good at home and not as good away. It happens.

The North

The North division is much less topsy-turvy. As we expected, Nebraska's at the top, with Missouri as a solid second.

However, the Big 12 North did bring us yesterday's single craziest game, in which an abysmal KU team scored 35 points in the last twelve minutes of the fourth quarter to go from being down 45-17 to beating Colorado 52-45. Totally insane. Dan Hawkins should never get another head coaching job.

In other North news, both K-State and Iowa State are coming along nicely. It now seems reasonable to hope that they will not be dead weight in next year's 10-team conference. Thanks and gig'em, guys.

The future!

Which is to say, the near future. There are three weeks left of regular season conference play. Here are the standings as of today:

ESPN.com knows I like the Aggies the best.

There are fifteen conference games yet to play. I went through them and made my predictions, picking the apparent favorites (my most arguable conclusions: A&M over Baylor and t.u., Oke State over Oklahoma), and this is what I think the final standings will be:

North

Nebraska 7-1

Mizzou 6-2

K-State 4-4

Iowa State 4-4

KU 1-7

CU 0-8

South

Oklahoma State 7-1

A&M 5-3

OU 5-3

Baylor 4-4

Texas Tech 3-5

t.u. 2-6

So the only big change I see is Baylor continuing to fall--they may well beat A&M and/or OU in Waco, but I think it slightly likelier that they won't. That would give us Oklahoma State vs. Nebraska in the championship game, and while it's hard to beat the same team twice, it's still looking probable that Nebraska walks away with a championship in their last year in the league. Dang.

The only teams already out of the South race are Texas Tech and t.u. Okahoma, even though they're fourth right now, is in a better position than A&M and Baylor because those two need Oklahoma State to lose twice. Oklahoma just needs to win out, because if they beat Oklahoma State in Bedlam (presuming Oke State has continued to win up to that point), they'll have the same conference record, and OU will own the tiebreaker.

In the North, it's hard to imagine Nebraska not winning. Mizzou, since they already lost to Nebraska, needs the Huskers to lose twice. With NU's last three games being against A&M, KU, and Colorado, that's pretty much an impossible dream.

Things I Enjoyed Today

1. Iowa State wins in Austin for the first time ever! Longhorns, you have been Cycl-OWNED!

I watched almost all of that game, and I'll tell you this--it wasn't even close. Iowa State didn't look great, for the most part, and I kept assuming that texas would snap out of it and come back eventually, but that just never happened. Iowa State didn't have great defense, but t.u.'s was worse. ISU was a little spotty on offense, but had way more good spots than texas. They won fair and square, and it was hilarious.

2. Texas A&M beats KU handily, as they absolutely had to.

Also, I guess I should be happy that Sherman was finally willing to give backup QB Ryan Tannehill lots of meaningful snaps . . . but it was weird that he waited to pull Jerrod until Jerrod was having a good game. His plan must have been to give Tannehill practice in a game situation, but not a risky game situation, so Tannehill will be more prepared if he ever has to go in and save a game that's going badly. It was still weird, though.

3. Wisconsin is good, you guys. They really are.

Of course, it helped that Iowa completely fouled up their clock management in the last minute of the game. You can't play fast and loose with your timeouts unless you've made Les Miles' deal with the devil. Anyway, the doubts I had about Wisconsin are pretty much gone after two consecutive impressive wins. They do still need help to win the Big Ten, though.

4. Because Mark Dantonio keeps fake-punting his way into my heart.

I know that, as a Badgers fan ("fan," rounding up from "well-wisher," anyway), I need to be rooting against Michigan State, the one conference team that has beaten Wisconsin. But . . . they're just so loveable! Dantonio calls a fake punt to beat Notre Dame, then he has a heart attack which he perseveres through, and then he fake punts again today to complete the comeback against Northwestern! (And besides, they weren't going to lose to Northwestern, the Big Ten master of the choke-job, even when they did go down 17-0.)

5. Navy keeps beating Notre Dame, which is nice.

Now if they can just keep beating them consecutively until 2051, they'll finally be even with 'em. Oh, and let's not forget how fun it is to say "Ken Niumatalolo."

6. LSU is no longer undefeated!

And the world makes just a little more sense.

7. Baylor's win over K-State puts them alone at the top of the Big 12 South.

They're probably more stoked about getting bowl-eligible for the first time since 1995, but the standings thing makes me smile. (Well, the Baylor part. Can we all agree to ignore the very bottom of the division standings?)

8. And now Missouri has taken down Oklahoma!

I can't really articulate why I was rooting for Missouri there, but here are some ideas:

a. I like when OU loses.

b. Mizzou was the underdog, and I generally like underdogs.

c. I would like there to be a team in the Big 12 North who can take the division from Nebraska (I don't really harbor any ill-will toward Nebraska for leaving the conference, but I really don't want them to win it on their way out the door).

d. It's comforting that the team that beat A&M 30-9 is legitimately good.

e. As always, it's fun when there are upsets at the top of the polls. It reminds me of good ol', crazy ol' 2007.

College Football: Week 6

It was a good one.

The number one story was number one ranked Alabama losing to one-loss South Carolina. And it wasn't close. South Carolina earned it. The best thing about this is that we get to stop hearing and reading ecstatic, breathless praises of how great Alabama is. I also thought they were very good, but that was getting old fast.

So our new #1 team is Ohio State (out with the old guard, in with the old guard). tOSU's win over Indiana was actually its third-biggest triumph of the weekend. Its biggest victory was South Carolina's loss, and its second-biggest victory was Penn State's loss. We all know by now that Penn State is not a good football team this year. However, it is still good on Illinois that they beat Penn State (and that they won in Happy Valley for the first time ever. As in ever), and may mean that they are not terrible, which means that Ohio State's non-blowout of them last week no longer makes tOSU look bad.

Now, as you know, I like Tony Barnhart, but he is a huge, unapologetic SEC homer. Today's evidence: his hand-wringing article "Will the SEC be shut out of the BCS championship game?" And the answer to his question is, if tOSU and Oregon keep winning, yes. And duh. Leave aside potential one-loss championship candidates--I don't think either SEC team that could finish the season undefeated (LSU or Auburn) will jump either tOSU or Oregon. Ohio State is Ohio State--maybe the only team this season with an SEC-like level of clout. (The rest of the Big Ten doesn't have it, the Big 12 South doesn't have it, even Nebraska--which we'll discuss soon--doesn't have it.) As for Oregon, they are crazy, man. That's just the kind of team you want to watch; they're so exciting. If they keep winning, the pollsters will want to see them in the title game.

It was, overall, not a great week for the Big 12. The brightest spot was Nebraska's victory over K-State, because A) people got to see it (since it was nationally broadcast on a Thursday night) and B) they, and specifically their freshman QB Taylor Martinez, looked wicked good. When you start getting tagged as Denard Robinson-esque, and your team can play defense, you're in a good place.

But let us not forget the Aggie loss to Arkansas. OK, here's the thing: that was not a game I expected the Ags to win. They actually kept the score closer than I would have predicted. And the defense continued to look surprisingly good. However. With the troubles that the defense gave Ryan Mallett, just imagine how easy it would have been for the Ags to pull the upset, if only the offense had shown up. I'm glad that this wasn't another five-turnover game, but Jerrod and the Jerrodettes did not do their job. I don't get this team.

It's a good thing for Texas Tech that they beat Baylor, because (as Angela pointed out) Iowa State didn't do anything to help Tech's dignity. I know Utah is good, but giving up 68 points (at home, no less)? What are you doing, Iowa State? What are you doing?

In Big Ten news, Wisconsin continued to keep Paul Bunyan's axe by stepping on Minnesota's throat. Much has been made of the fact that Tim Brewster got all snippy about Bret Bielema going for a two-point conversion when Wisconsin was already up by 25 points. Bielema has been criticized for his explanation that "the card" that tells you when to go for two told him to go for it. Much derision has been heaped on "the card." I seem to be the only person who remembers that this happened before, to card-owner Dennis Franchione. Apparently it's a thing college coaches do, and for reasons unknown to all of us who don't get paid millions of dollars, they think they should go for two when already winning by a whole lot.

Elsewhere:

Les Miles got super, super lucky again. Again. The unlikeliest thing: think of how a football is shaped. Then think about how likely it is that it would happen to land on a part of its surface that would cause it to bounce up perfectly, like a basketball. Not. Very. Likely.

Florida State murdered Miami. The ACC continues to perplex and confound. We should really just quarantine those guys so their games won't wreak havoc on everybody else's strengths of schedule.

Say what you will, but Auburn keeps winning. I don't know how comfortable I am with Auburn being good (mostly because I have Opinions about Gene Chizik). I do like this quote from their (very good) quarterback, though: "You can't go to Walmart and buy team chemisty." And even if you could, how would you figure out which aisle it was on?

Michigan State OF COURSE beat Michigan. Michigan was favored by Vegas to win that game, which just goes to show you that Vegas doesn't know everything.

Notre Dame beat Pittsburgh, for whatever that's worth. (Read: not much.) In related news, Kirk Herbstreit said on GameDay that he now expects Notre Dame (current record: 3-3) to go 9-3 on the season. To that I say, calm down, Herbie. Calm down.

0-5 New Mexico played 0-4 New Mexico State and one of them managed to win. I suppose that should be obvious, but I thought I should point it out just in case. They're both quite, quite bad. (But now 0-6 New Mexico is worse.)

In a less-sad (but still by no means gleeful) matchup, Georgia finally won a conference game by mercilessly smothering Tennessee. It's going to be a long season in Knoxville. And already has been, really.

Finally, besides there being postseason baseball in town (so I am told), the DFW area also hosted five college football games on Saturday. One crazy dude and his friend went to all of them. Even though he takes shots at Aggie fans, I'm still going to label that awesome.

Texas A&M: Rest-of-the-Season Outlook

Um.

Well . . .

Hmm.

Let's start here: I believed in my heart of hearts that A&M was going to beat Oklahoma State. That first half, where A&M looked good on both sides of the ball and Oke State's offense looked like it had been wildly oversold, was what I truly thought--despite trying to keep my expectations realistic--that game was going to look like.

Then the second half . . . I can't call it "a nightmare" because A&M managed to come back after all should have been lost. I can't say that it lived down to my worst expectations, because I never expected, not even after the FIU game, that Jerrod would be this team's problem.

That's where we need to go next: Jerrod Johnson. After watching the OSU game, I now have to retract all the things I said about him being the Big 12's elite quarterback. I think he's a very good QB, but he not a great QB. I don't know if it's his shoulder, or his shoulder affecting his confidence, or what, but a great quarterback doesn't throw eight interceptions in two games. Even more so, a great quarterback doesn't allow a ball to just fall out of his hand where the other team can pick it up. It's hard to emphasize how disgusted I was with that fumble. He wasn't even touched. He just fumbled it.

Jerrod did some great stuff in that game and he did some horrible stuff. Now, the offensive line could have played better, and the defense clearly dropped off quite a bit in the second half. But Jerrod pretty much lost the game. The one person who, coming into the season, looked like the most promising thing about the entire team, now looks to be its biggest liability.

Do you want some good news? That's super easy: coming into this season, I believed that this had to be the year if the Ags wanted to win the division. There were two reasons: that OU and t.u. were going to have down years, and that Jerrod is a senior. Now, since most of the team is looking good and is still, for the most part, very young, it looks like the team ought to be better next year. I'm not saying that Jerrod isn't going to be a loss, but if Ryan Tannehill can do 75% of the good that Jerrod does without the bad that Jerrod has done in the last two games, the Ags would be in good shape. The t.u./OU rebuilding thing is still a concern, but I feel pretty good going forward with a team with several promising players on both sides of the ball and, of course, a coach that might actually know what he's doing.

Oh, were you looking for good news that amounted to something other than "wait 'til next year"? (I don't blame you.) Here's what I've come up with: maybe Oklahoma State is really good. And maybe the Ags will eliminate some of the mistakes. That first half, and flashes of goodness in the second half, make me think that this team could beat anybody left on the schedule. They don't have the ability to run the rest of the table, certainly, but each game is a possible win.

I truly believe that, in my heart of hearts.

Although we know how that can go.

The remaining schedule

10/9, vs. Arkansas: Toughest game on the slate. I think I just lied a few paragraphs ago, because I find it hard to imagine the Ags winning this one, if only because Arky has had a week off (to brood over their loss to Alabama and get super-ready to take it out of somebody). But who knows? I just want the Ags to look OK on TV, basically. Loss.

10/16, Missouri: Mizzou looks pretty similar to A&M so far. They've beaten up a couple weak teams, but almost lost to another weak team. They beat Illinois, but not as badly as they should have. The Ags have home field advantage, but on the other hand, it's going to be shown on TV. It's probably either my hopeless optimism or my contempt for the Big 12 North, but I like the Ags in this one. Win.

10/23, at Kansas: A&M lost last year to Colorado, which was an inferior team. That's the only reason why I might worry about this game against the worst team in the conference. I can't let that worry guide this pick, though. Win.

10/30, Texas Tech: Well, I don't think Tech is very good, do you? Win.

11/6, Oklahoma: This is one of the games I was thinking of, where the Ags could win (with excellent execution, luck, and opponent complacency). And yet, loss.

11/13, at Baylor: If you think I've been too big a Pollyanna in this post, try this prediction on for size: Baylor's not bad this year. They've got a good, exciting quarterback. They might have enough fans show up to the game, for once, so that Floyd Casey Stadium is not Kyle Field North. To top it off, the Ags have been terrible in November for years. Loss.

11/20, Nebraska: I guess Nebraska is pretty good, although it's hard to say since they haven't played anybody. Probably a loss.

11/25, at t.u.: Ew, I don't like that five-day turnaround. (The 'horns technically have one, too, but they'll be playing Florida Atlantic while the Ags take on Nebraska.) But over the last six years except for 2008, the Ags have either beaten t.u. or made them work much harder than expected for a win. This year, they really aren't that good and, if I'm right (as I hope I'm not) about the previous three weeks, the Ags will really need a win here. So, what the hey, win.

That would make the Aggies 7-5 on the season, which will be a disappointment but (depending on how the losses look) not grounds for firing Sherman. I'm still hoping they scrape up eight, but I was kind of counting on them beating Oke State.

Some Things I Think about This Week's AP Poll

For reference, here it is.

1. LSU didn't move down?!? At all?!? I don't know why they aren't being punished for having the worst coach in college football.

2. Oregon leapfrogged Boise, which I suppose was inevitable. When that will happen in the coaches' poll, I wonder? I hope this means they'll be able to move past Ohio State if Oregon keeps looking awesome and OSU keeps looking pretty good.

3. There are three non-AQ teams in the top ten. The people who give out BCS bowl bids must be incredibly relieved that Utah and TCU play each other.

4. Notable fall-outs: t.u., USC, and Penn State. Good thing, too, since none of those teams is particularly good at football.

5. When will Michigan hurry up and lose already so we can stop pretending they're a ranking-worthy team? Oh wait, they play Michigan State next week. That should do it.

6. Oke State is in at #22. Beating the Aggies is good enough to get a team ranked! Fig leaf of dignity!!

7. And rounding out the last three spots, we've got Florida State (got beat down by OU), Missouri (almost lost to San Diego State), and Air Force (barely got beat by OU, woo!). Yeah, they totally ran out of good teams to rank.

Get Excited!

Next weekend looks to be a good one in college football, so I put together viewing recommendations. You're welcome!

Thursday, 6:30 CDT, ESPN (and ESPN 3, for those without cable and with the right internet provider): Texas A&M at Oklahoma State

The Aggies are finally televised, you guys! (Of course, we know how badly that has gone in recent history, but I'm stubbornly excited anyway.) Both of these teams have been tough to figure out. Each one has a potentially explosive offense, but each also has had a too-close win over a poor opponent. This game is important not just for both teams, but for the Big 12 South as a whole. As I will gleefully expand upon below, the division's pecking order is more uncertain than usual. The winner of this game will become the best darkhorse candidate to go to the conference championship game.

I still like the Ags in this one. My hope is that the offense will recovery from the temporary insanity displayed in the FIU game, and I have an unaccustomed faith in the A&M defense.

Saturday, 11:00 AM CDT, ESPN2: Miami at Clemson

By default, the most interesting morning game is between teams that are, by default, two of the favorites to win the ACC. (My personal favorite, NC State, plays an intriguing game against Va Tech in the afternoon.)

2:30 PM CDT, ABC/ESPN (depending on region): texas vs. Oklahoma

It's the Red River Shootout, suckas! Which of these teams is better? Is either really good? One of these questions will be answered on Saturday. The second question will remain open, because we'll be watching a one-loss team (that lost to UCLA--and pray remember that K-State beat them) playing an undefeated team with exactly one impressive win. The winner of this game will still be the favorite to win the Big 12 South, but unless that team does well in the eyeball test, will not be the favorite to win the Big 12.

Now, the mirror game (ABC/ESPN, depending on region) is Wisconsin-Michigan State, which will go a long way to showing how good Wisconsin is. As a UW fan, I'm bracing myself for a loss.

7:00 PM CDT, ABC: Stanford at Oregon

The more obvious answer at 7:00 may be Florida at Alabama on CBS, but I expect that to be a much less interesting game. Alabama ought to take care of business against Florida. Meanwhile, with Stanford and Oregon, who knows? They're two teams that are better than almost anybody thought they'd be, they have very different styles, and the Pac-10 championship may well be on the line. I predict craziness.

Post-Mortem: Texas A&M vs. Florida International

One of the many articles I read about last Saturday's Aggie game included the observation that "Aggie fans [are] seemingly in a perpetual state of angst about football." Now, while that sentence is a little rich from someone who covers life-or-death Cornhusker football, I'm not going to argue with it. I know I'm perpetually angsty about Aggie football. So about Saturday . . .

Glass Half Full (GHF): Hey, they won, right? 3-0, right on schedule.

Glass Half Empty (GHE): Why, WHY did Texas A&M ever get down 20-6 to a team that's only played Division 1 football for five years?!?

There's one easy answer to this, although there are two ways to put it. The nice way is "turnovers." The mean way is "Jerrod sucked."

Let's look at ESPN's handy scoring summary:

Now with my handy annotations:

I have not turned on Jerrod. However, it's impossible to put a positive spin on an 11-completion (out of 31 passes), six sack, 1 TD/4INT outing.

I forgive you, sweetie. I forgive you.

GHF: Jerrod just had a bad game. That happens to everybody sometimes, right? From the same article I quoted at top: '"I was trying to do too much,'' Johnson said. "I don't really know what I was doing."' He was just in a bad head space--nothing permanent.

GHE: That quote is followed by, "Wow! That's not what you want to hear from a fifth-year senior who is in his third year as a starter" and preceded by, "So much for the Heisman Trophy talk." Maybe Jerrod is not who we thought he was. Or maybe he's not who he actually was last year--it can't be a good sign that he threw half the number of interceptions he threw all of last year in one quarter last week. Maybe, despite what he says, his shoulder isn't fully recovered from surgery.

GHF: But despite Jerrod playing so badly, the Aggies still won. The defense was genuinely good--Robert Cessna gave them an A, for goodness' sake! Check it: "A&M bailed out the offense time after time. Because of turnovers, FIU had to go only 51 yards to score its 13 points on offense, but the Golden Panthers needed 16 plays to accomplish that against the improving Aggie defense." Nice, right? (Also, Cessna clearly has a mad man-crush on Tim DeRuyter, which I find encouraging.)

GHE: Yet last season's sack leader--of the country, not the team--Von Miller hasn't recorded a sack (depending who you ask--Richard Croome credits him with one). When is his sprained ankle going to get better?

GHF: It wasn't just the defense that came through; the run game also came up big. Jerrod is not the Ags' only offensive weapon. Thanks, Christine and Cyrus!

GHE: So why didn't they turn it on until the fourth quarter? Three quarters of nightmarishly awful play will not cut it in conference play, not even against Baylor.

GHF: Theoretically, they--the entire team--will learn from that fourth quarter. In David Ubben's opinion, "The Aggies seem to know what went wrong and managed to fix it in time to salvage an ugly win. They're willing to chalk it up to a bad day when a lot went wrong and they had too many 2nd and 3rd-and-longs. But until a Thursday night date with the Cowboys on Sept. 30, they won't be able to prove it." Aggie receiver Terrance McCoy thinks the team played so badly because they were overconfident. Those first three quarters have assuredly cured them of that.

And . . . believe it or not, I'm going to end on that glass-half-full note. I won't give you the gory details, but I was pretty distraught about the Aggies' performance while the game was going on. (All right, fine. I cried some. Look, it had been a long day and I thought my team's possible at-long-last-maybe-good-season was going down the toilet.) However, after the game and after doing this post-mortem, I am, to my surprise, feeling OK (not great, but OK) about the Ags going forward.

I'm looking at the FIU game like I looked at the K-State game last year--really, really, really horrible, but with much of the horribleness caused by one-off hideous performances and some plain old bad luck. As you may recall, the Ags came back from the jaw-droppingly bad K-State loss with their first win in Lubbock since the mid-90's. I believe they can--can--come back from the FIU near-loss with a win over Oke State next Thursday.

I've still got angst, though. I'm extremely worried that I'm not worried enough.

College Football: Week 2

There's lots to say about the most recent weekend of college football, but let's see if I can round this up in three main points.

The ACC and the Terrible Horrible No Good Very Bad Saturday

In the preseason coaches' poll, Florida State was ranked #20. On Saturday, they lost to Oklahoma (a team that struggled against Utah State--not Utah, Utah State--in Week 1) by a score of 47-17. And seven of FSU's points came in garbage time. They are now "receiving votes" in the polls.

In preseason, North Carolina was ranked #18, and it seemed like this might really be Butch Davis's year. UNC is now under very serious investigation by the NCAA, and it might really be Butch Davis's year to get fired. They're 0-1 and receiving fewer votes than FSU.

In preseason, Georgia Tech was ranked #17. Then they got beaten by a KU team that had opened the season getting beaten by a team from a Dakota. They're now receiving three more votes than UNC.

In preseason, Miami was ranked #13. They just got beaten by Ohio State, although to be fair, OSU is regarded as the second-best team in the country, and Miami was expected to lose. They probably weren't expected to have their QB throw four interceptions or to score over half their points on kick returns, though. They've only dropped to #17.

In preseason, Virginia Tech was ranked #6. In Week 1, they lost a great game to Boise State, which dropped them a bit, but hey, Boise State is good. This week, they lost to James Madison, an FCS team, and became only the second ranked team ever to lose to an opponent from that level (the first was of course Michigan losing to Appalachian State in 2007). It's an utter disaster for A) Virginia Tech, which is now 0-2 to start the season and totally embarrassed B) the ACC, which has seen its most likely national title contender go down in flames and C) Boise State, whose supposed "quality" win might now count for very little. Virginia Tech is now receiving exactly four votes in the coaches' poll (none in the AP), and keep in mind that Frank Beamer gets to vote and may well have put his team at #22 on his ballot.

I'm not even joking. I sincerely think that's what happened.

"Monster" Saturday: the Wrong Kind of Monster

ESPN promoted Saturday heavily as a day of clashes between titans (and presumably, good, close games). But Florida State got stomped by Oklahoma. Miami-Ohio State wasn't as close as the final score would make you think. Alabama throttled Penn State and perhaps would have throttled harder if not for Nick Saban's respect for Joe Pa. In other blowout news, I was pleasantly surprised when Tennessee and Oregon were tied at the end of the first half, and then unpleasantly unsurprised when UT did nothing in the second half, unless you count allowing Oregon to score 35 points "something." (Fun* fact: Oregon has scored 120 points in 120 minutes of play.)

*Fun, depending whether your team of choice plays Oregon or not.

On the other hand, there were plenty of games that should have been blow-outs that were not. I already told you my feelings about West Virginia's near-loss to Marshall, so suffice it to say it's ridiculous that they climbed a spot in both polls, regardless of who else lost this week. Florida's final score against South Florida looks OK, but they looked bad in the first half. Conference play will not be kind. Similarly, Wisconsin's victory margin over San Jose State doesn't seem too bad, but the Badgers had some sloppy play that would not go unpunished in Big Ten games.

This was another week with two FCS upsets over BCS-conference opponents, for besides the James Madison takedown of Va Tech, Minnesota managed to lose to a team from a Dakota. This is the second time Tim Brewster has done that, so don't expect him to keep his job for long. Oh, and speaking of coaches who will soon be fired, with a 52-7 (fifty-two to seven!) loss to Cal, Dan Hawkins. Per usual.

How 'bout them Aggies?

Apparently, the Ags started sloppy, but I'm not going to complain about a score of 48-16. (If I were going to complain, I'd ask why La Tech scored double digits, or why the Ags turned it over so many times, but I'm not going to.)

And in an interesting development, as Stuart Mandel has pointed out, Arkansas is now WILDLY overrated. They've beaten Tennessee Tech and Louisiana-Monroe by 41 and 24, which is absolutely nothing to get excited about, considering it was Tennessee Tech and Louisiana-Monroe. Considering their mediocre performance last year, rankings in the low teens are just stupid. It's really too bad they play Georgia and Alabama before they play the Aggies, because if you lose to a highly ranked team, oh well, they were highly ranked. If you beat them, which is easier if they shouldn't be ranked, it gets you ranked. Hopefully, enough luster will stay on Arkansas through Week 5 that the Ags can benefit from it.

College Football: Week 1

For the most part, Week 1 went the way Week 1 is supposed to go: cupcakes got smashed. My teams did what they needed to do: A&M crushed Stephen F. Austin 48-7 (as broken down in Robert Cessna's ever-essential grading of the Aggies), Wisconsin went to UNLV and beat them 41-21 (which would have been more lopsided if not for some opening-night mistakes by the Badgers) and Tennessee walloped Tennessee-Martin by the extremely fake-sounding score of 50-0. Oh, and Minnesota defied my expectations and did not lose to Middle Tennessee State . . . although they were trailing MTSU as late as the fourth quarter.

Some cupcakes got smashed beyond all recognition, as in Oregon's 72-0 murder of New Mexico; some cupcakes got smashed not as much as expected--both texas and especially Oklahoma turned in surprisingly small margins of victory. This increases my suspicion that they haven't reloaded as easily as the pollsters think. Florida, which apparently looked clumsy and ridiculous against Miami Ohio, also falls into this category.

There were two embarrassing upsets, one funnier than the other. The unlikeable Houston Nutt and his Ole Miss Rebels got taken down in double overtime by Jacksonville State. The nice little story you'll find in the recaps of the game: Jacksonville State's head coach was ignominiously fired as head coach of Arkansas after losing his season opener to the Citadel, a I-AA team. Now, as the coach of FCS (ex-I-AA) Jacksonville State, he embarrassed somebody else in their opener! Aww. It's the circle of life.

A bigger downer is Kansas's loss to North Dakota State, 6-3. Leaving aside how it was Turner Gill's first game as head coach and how he seems like a very nice man who wants to run a nice program . . . what a horrible game that must have been to watch. Imagine being in the stands for three or four hours and not just watching your team lose to what should have been a far inferior opponent, but only seeing three field goals scored all game. Ugh. Well, I guess everybody in Lawrence can just go back to pretending football doesn't exist.

Meanwhile, some teams played real teams this weekend. Daring!

The Big East should maybe start scheduling themselves easier games on opening weekend. After all, it's hard to keep up the facade that you deserve an automatic BCS bid when you collectively lose to Utah, Fresno State, Kentucky, and Rich Rod's Michigan team, right off the bat. (Seriously, can somebody explain to me why the Big East is a BCS conference?)

LSU managed to barely beat a severely depleted UNC (as Pat Forde dubs them, the University of Non-Compliance), because, as always, Les Miles is a bad coach. Also, those of you who watched this game, who were you rooting for? I like an underdog (and dislike Les Miles), but UNC only was one because so many of their guys are apparently rule-breakers. I don't see the feel-good story here that I'm apparently supposed to.

TCU, getting their BCS-buster-bid off to a good start, beat Oregon State (and by doing so proved what good luck it is to have Lee Corso pick against you). This is bad news for Boise State's own BCS-buster-bid, since they also play Oregon State. When you're an outsider team, your few insider opponents need to have as much luster as possible.

Of course, the weekend isn't over yet. We still get to get a glimpse of whether Tommy Tuberville can mesh with Texas Tech's players at all. And of course, the biggest game of the week doesn't happen until tomorrow, when Boise State takes on Virginia Tech. Get--or, at least in my case, continue to be--excited!

The Final Off-Season Post

College football starts tomorrow, you guys! Tomorrow!

Admittedly, I won't be watching any powerhouse matchups such as North Dakota at Idaho, Towson at Indiana, or perennial favorite Florida Atlantic at UAB. In all seriousness, the most interesting game on the opening night docket is Minnesota at Middle Tennessee. I stand by my prediction that Middle Tennessee will triumph.

A few more thoughts to chew on before we actually get to watch some games:

Stewart Mandel at SI wonders why Texas A&M is getting all the dark horse attention in the Big 12 instead of Texas Tech. Now, I stand by my optimism about A&M's upcoming season; however, I have to concede his point that Tommy Tuberville being better than Mike Sherman. I think the jury's still out on Sherman, but that's probably the optimism talking again.

It may be that official word on future Big Ten divisions comes down today. It will probably be stupid.

People can't stop talking about Boise State's national title merits. I still think all of the attention is going to jinx them, and they'll lose this weekend to Virginia Tech. Not because they're a worse team. Just because it's the universe's little joke to immediately make all this summer's speculation pointless.

I forgot to share this when it came out, but apparently Dan "Ten Wins and No Excuses" Hawkins (who went 3-9 last year and only avoided being fired because the University of Colorado has no money to buy out his contract) wants a contract extension. If I may share my gut reaction to this story: BWAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA [gasp] HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!

Finally, Jerrod Johnson isn't just probably the best quarterback in the Big 12, he's probably the best singing quarterback in the Big 12 (or perhaps all major conferences):

Season Preview: the Fightin' Texas Aggies

This off-season has taught me something about myself: being an Aggie fan for the past ten (or so) years* has scarred me a smidge. You see, I kept reading all these positive things about the upcoming season--this is an A&M with decent expectations. And my first reaction was creeping terror. Expectations, in my experience, lead to disappointment, if not heartbreak.

But I think--I think--I'm starting to get over it. Maybe it's just that I'm getting used to the idea that my own team actually has talent and experience and a coaching staff that can find their collective posterior with their collective number of hands.

Overview

The most exciting part of this team is (by far) its offensive skill players. We've got a very good receiving corps, some quite promising running backs, and probably the best quarterback in the Big 12, for crying out loud. They all performed really well last year (for the most part) and should be even better this year. (This is the kind of thing that makes me nervous. A super talented Aggie offense? You haven't seen any apocalyptic-looking horsemen around, have you?)

In spite of myself, I'm also kind of excited about the defense. Experts agree: if they can be merely competent, the offense can lead this team to very good places. (Money quote from the Yahoo! Sports preview magazine: "Three times last season A&M scored at least 31 points and lost.") They've been terrible--just abysmal--for Coach Sherman's tenure so far, but this could be the year they turn the corner. The new defensive coordinator, Tim DeRuyter (da-ROOT-er, according to Aggie Athletics), was lured away from Air Force because he did such a good job there. He's switching the Ags to the 3-4, which should work better with the team's personnel. Plus, we've got Von Miller, and he's so good!

And he wears glasses!

To be sure, he can't pick up the slack if the other ten guys are no better than last year, but it's nice to have him there.

So we've got Jerrod on one side and Von on the other, but that can't erase all the worries.

Second-biggest worry: the offensive line. They showed improvement over the course of last season, and we've finally got some more talented guys up there, but they're young. Jerrod can't Heisman it up if he has to run for his life on every play.

Biggest worry: special teams. Dangit, why did I already use up the word "abysmal"? They were so bad last year. Don't blow off the importance of special teams--if the Aggies had been competent on the third side of the ball last year, they wouldn't have lost that bowl game to Georgia. End of story. Maybe they'll be better because they've got a new coordinator too? And of course, there's the "They'll be better because they have to be" theory, which is frankly what I'm hanging my hopes on.

What does all of this add up to?

Rankings smörgåsbord:

Here's what my beloved preview magazines have to say. Yahoo! Sports ranks the Ags 43rd in the country, third in the Big 12 South. Athlon says 35th and third respectively. Lindy's (whose rankings, overall, look to me to be the least likely) goes with 30th and--brace yourself--third. It's a consensus that texas and Oklahoma will still be the cream of the division and that Tech, Oke State, and Baylor will be non-factors.

Similarly, the New York Times' college football blog (summarizing a longer article at Pre-Snap Read) places the Ags 34th in the nation.

Finally, A&M is "receiving votes" in the one that kind of matters, the preseason coaches' poll--the Aggies are getting 45th-most votes, if you take the time to count up the RVers. How many votes does that translate to, you ask? Why, a healthy three! Interestingly, A&M is getting fewer votes than Oklahoma State and Texas Tech--maybe the coaches don't read the magazines?

So if the average prediction comes true, we're looking at finishing the season definitively outside the Top 25, but at least on a few people's minds. (Alamo or Insight Bowl, I'd suppose.) But that won't win Jerrod a Heisman, now will it?

Schedule

It is my tradition not to predict the outcomes of A&M's conference games until the non-conference slate is over. This year, unusually, we have the first conference matchup (against Oklahoma State) before the last non-con (Arkansas). So I'm just going to pick the first four and save the last eight until after they're done. (A&M vs. Oke State seems to be the easier call anyway.)

9/4, Stephen F. Austin: Layup.

9/11, Louisiana Tech: A team A&M should beat even if they didn't have a new coach.

9/18, Florida International: And that makes three.

9/30, at Oklahoma State: I like the odds of starting 4-0, I really do. Oke State lost a lot, a lot, of guys, and I've never been sold on Mike Gundy. Last year was their big chance to achieve something, and they blew it. When you think about it, it's a bit surprising T. Boone hasn't put out a hit on Deion Sanders. That we know of.

Now, if the Ags win these, and depending on how they win (and on how everybody else does, of course), we'll be able to see if the Aggies might be able to make some noise this season. Here are some more things to consider:

Arkansas is a team in the same general mold of the Aggies--big-time offense, afterthought defense. Their offense is, however, bigger-time than ours (at least so far).

This year's North slate is Mizzou, at Kansas, and Nebraska. It's nice that the tougher two are at Kyle. I don't have high hopes for the Nebraska game, because I'd have more faith in their lousy offense against our possibly lousy defense than in our possibly terrific offense against their very serious defense. (Did that make sense?) I'm pretty confident about the Kansas game--new coach, bare cupboard, same old story. The Mizzou game falls somewhere in the middle. I never have a great handle on those guys, mostly because of my apathy toward them.

Texas Tech and Baylor, like Oklahoma State, don't really scare me that much this year. Tech's got a new coach, and although Tommy Tuberville's great, it's hard to predict how he's going to mesh with the guys on Tech's roster. The system he's going to want to run is very different from the system most of them were recruited to play in. Baylor should be better than they were last year, because their crazy amazing quarterback, Robert Griffin III, will be back from injury (on top of the natural arc of improvement they should be following in their third year under Art Briles). But that means they should be roughly as good as the Aggies were last year, shooting for bowl eligibility. (You'll hear this anywhere Baylor is mentioned, but if they make it, it would be their first bowl game since 1994.) They could beat us, but the odds aren't good enough for me to fret about it.

As for the big boys--another thing the experts all seem to think is that texas and Oklahoma are going to be just about as good as usual. They're projected to compete with each other (and Nebraska) for the conference championship and to be at least in the discussion for the national title game. (t.u. and OU are respectively ranked fourth and eighth in the preseason coaches' poll.)

I'm a little dubious. (Is "hopefully dubious" a thing?) The t.u. team lost most of the stars that studded last year's national championship runner-up team. OU was totally wrecked by injuries last year (yes, for a Bob Stoops team, eight wins counts as "totally wrecked"), and they should be better this year, but they still don't have comparable guys to those that were the runners-up to Florida in the '08 championship. The prevailing theory seems to be that with the two schools' top-notch coaching and recruiting, they can simply reload to stay at an elite level no matter who graduated or got drafted. I just don't know if I'm buying it.

Here's the thing: texas and Oklahoma, if I'm guessing right, might have down years in the same year. This is the last year of eligibility for Jerrod Johnson, who's the best quarterback to come through A&M in a long, long time, and he's got an excellent supporting cast. What I'm getting at is, I want A&M to win the Big 12 South.

Now, next year's Aggie team might be better than this one, because even though we'll lose Jerrod and Von, everybody else will be a year older and wiser, and trouble spots like the offensive and defensive lines should continue to improve. But OU and t.u. will probably be fully reloaded again, so I think our odds will probably be worse. (Of course, by next year, there will be no such thing as winning the division, only winning the conference. But, practically speaking, that's not going to be much different than winning the South is now.)

So that's what I want. What I expect (as in "These are my bare minimum expectations for you, Mike Sherman") is an eight-win season. I could live with seven, but I wouldn't be happy about it. Nine would be nice, ten terrific. Eight is doable. It's not asking too much. Go forth and win at least eight, Aggies!

*Yes, since I didn't become an Aggie fan until I started school there, that statement made me feel old, too.