FanNation - The Republic of Sport

Here's a synopsis:

1. Big 10 2007 Conference Champs

2. Big 10 2007 Strength

3. The Big 10 was weak

4. conference XYZ is the strongest

5. Why OSU got Clobbered in the 2006 NC Game

6. Why OSU lost the 2007 NC game

7. OSU made the NC game in 2007 because of an Easy Schedule

8. Perspective

9. Haters

1. Big 10 2007 Conference Champs

Yes, the Big 10 was down.  OSU wasn't supposed to win the conference title in 2007 - in fact they were picked to finish 4^th though a lot of bloggers and journalists have bumped that up to 3^rd after the fact.  With 11 FR and SO starters to only 3 SRs, if they picked them higher it was a stupid pick and they should have their column taken away.

The reason they won the title is easy... and not so easy.

1. Wisconsin was expected to be in a 2 horse race for the conference title.  They got hit hard with injuries and suspensions.  Really hard.  As a result, they finished 4^th.

2. Michigan was supposed to be the other horse.  It will be interesting 1 or 2 years from now when it comes out why they started the season so bad.  I suspect Carr was going light on his seniors in his last year as coach - it isn't just a line saying he cared more about his players than winning... perhaps in 2007 he cared too much.  After the start, the answer is easy - injuries crippled his star offensive players Henne and Hart.  By the time they reached the OSU Michigan game, they didn't look to have the intensity or will that the fans have come to expect in the rivalry.  In their bowl game they didn't show the discipline (net 4 turnovers) but at least showed the speed and skill.

Instead these teams finished 3^rd and 4^th.

With the top 2 teams gone the door was open for Tressel to win the Big 10 in a rebuilding year.

Since everyone asks, I consider replacing departing starters with quality JR and SR players to be reloading, anything less to be rebuilding.  OSU had 11 FR/SO starters and only 4 SR on the 1^st and 2^nd string combined - a good definition of rebuilding.

2. Big 10 2007 Strength

1. As note above, the top 2 teams were absent.  You take out the top 2 teams of any conference and you're gonna look weak.  Imagine 2007 with Virginia and Clemson in the ACC conference title game, Kansas and Texas in the Big 12 conference title, Auburn and UGA in the SEC title, Oregon State champion of the PAC 10, and Cincinnati Champions of the Big East.  All of these were decent teams in 2007.  All of these were substantially less than their conferences champion.  There's a big drop from 1 to 3.

3. OSU, Wisconsin, and PSU were young.  Very young.  OSU had half the starters FR or SO, almost no seniors - in fact they lost only 5 from the 1^st 2 strings.  Wisconsin only had a handful of seniors starting.  PSU was similar, a real surprise considering JoPa reputation for not starting underclassmen.

4. You can throw Illinois into the youth mix.  Sure, they lost a lot more starters to graduation and early exit to the NFL, but most of Zook's talent was still young or on the pine from their top 20 recruiting classes in 07, top 30 class in 06.  (The classes were ranked in the 40s in 05 and 04, in the 30s in 03).

5. Iowa, who finished 6^th, had among the youngest rosters in the country and played like it.  They were beset by inconsistent play, and they looked better as the year wore on.

6. Of the 5 remaining teams, Michigan State, Indiana, and Minnesota had coaches in their 1^st year.

In short, you take out your top 2 preseason teams, have most of the talent of the next 4 young underclassmen, and 3 of the 5 remaining teams with 1^st year head coaches and you are destined for a down year.

3. The Big 10 was weak

Playing without their pre-season top 2 teams, the Big 10 showed a lot of strength in some close losses against top teams from other conferences.

1. In the 1^st game of the season, Zook's rebuilding effort showed he was already to the level he could challenge the Big 12 2^nd place team Missouri, pulling to within 3 in the 4th before loosing by 6.

2. 4^th place Wisconsin showed that even hampered with injuries, they were still at the level they could challenge the SEC 2nd place team, driving inside the 15 for the go ahead score in the 4th before loosing by 4 in a loosing effort.  When your gimpy 4^th place team is challenging another conferences 2^nd place team, who's conference strength does this speak towards?

3. Michigan State showed they could compete against the ACC 2nd place team, taking Boston College deep in the 4th before loosing by 3.  C'mon folks - by the way most would determine the tie breaker, this was the Big 10 8th place team against the ACC 2^nd, behind a 1^st year Spartan head coach no less.

4. I wouldn't consider it a great win because it was the Big 10 2nd (equivalent to a division 2^nd) against the SEC division 3^rd, and I give little credence to the ability of sportswriters to accurately rank teams, but unranked Michigan did look the faster team with the high octane offense in their win over Florida.  I am not certain how many mistakes Michigan would have had to make to loose that game, but apparently a net -4 turnovers wasn't enough.  Need more?  In their other 3 losses against UGA, Auburn, and LSU, Florida committed more turnovers.  If these teams had committed a net -4 turnovers, how many outcomes would have been in Florida's favor?

While in an off year the Big 10 couldn't get over the hump and beat a top 2 team from another major conference, they did give the 2^nd place team from the ACC, Big 12, and SEC all they could handle before loosing by 3 to 6 points.  When your 4^th place team is taking a conference 2^nd to the end of the 4^th before loosing by 4, or you 8^th place team is taking a conference 2^nd to the end of the 4^th before loosing by 3, which conference strength does this speak towards?  Were they really that far down in 2007?

4. Conference XYZ is the strongest

If you think your conference is measurably stronger than any of the other major 6 conferences, you better keep your blinders on, because you don't want to look past a couple of games if you want to continue to live in your self created Xanadu.

The results from the field of play, looking at inter-conference games of an entire conference over a 2 or 3 year period will show you might be able to argue your team would finish at most 1 slot higher or lower, no better, no worse.

To show this, I will use the Fan Nation classics - Big 10 and SEC.

2007 was the 1^st time since 2003 the SEC had a winning record in the series, 2-1, the difference being close with SEC #2 Tennessee edging out Big 10 #4 Wisconsin by 4 - big margin, huh?

If you go back to 2006, the record favors the Big 10, 4-3

If you go back to 2005, the record favors the Big 10, 6-4

If you go back to 2004, the record favors the Big 10, 8-6

If you go back to 2003, the record is even, 9-9

Anyone who knows me knows I am not about to stop with just a topical analysis.  Does it really mean much that Michigan beat Vanderbilt?  Since we are talking about CONFERENCE strength, I took it a step further to give an apples to apples comparison.  I looked at the games based on how the team finished in the conference, equating a 3^rd or 4^th place in the Big 10 to a division 2^nd in the SEC, 5^th or 6^th to 3^rd, etc.  If you have a dominant conference, you should be able to routinely beat teams that finished the same and lower in the other conference, and teams that finished slightly higher.  I only went back to 2003 because looking up older stats is a real hassle.  Except for Michigan-Vandy, the match ups were either even (ex- Conference 4th vs. div 2^nd) or there was less than a difference of 1 place (conference 5th vs. div 2^nd).

When both teams finished equally, the SEC has the edge 4-2.  Impressive 67%, but how much do you want to read into the outcome of 1 game changing the record to .500?

When the Big 10 team finished higher in the Big 10 than their opponent finished in the SEC, the Big 10 record is 4-0.  The Big 10 won the games they were supposed to.

When the SEC team finished higher in the SEC than their opponent finished in the Big 10, the SEC record is 5-3.  A different outcome in 1 game making it .500 doesn't speak well towards them being a clearly dominant conference.  If I had only gone back to 2004 the SEC is 3-3 against teams that finished lower in the Big 10.

So then came the comment 'The SEC is stronger in the middle and the bottom."  I went back - here's what the Big 10's look like when you compare them by equivalent finish in a division (for those of you with a short memory, scroll back 2 paragraphs to see how I equate conference to division):

Since most of the notable non-conference match ups are in the bowls, there's not a lot of comparison between teams that finished in the lower half of the conference, but what times they did play there's nothing to support the notion the SEC is stronger in the middle and the bottom.

In this example, if you want to claim the SEC is a dominant conference, you better keep your blinder on tight and narrow only looking at OSU in the NC game.  Against OSU the SEC has looked awesome.  When evenly matched against the rest of the Big 10 the SEC is .500.  When playing a team that finished lower in the Big 10 the SEC struggles to stay above .500.  Against teams that finished higher in the Big 10 not a win.  Zip.  Zilch.  Zero.  If you try to make the case for the case the SEC is stronger in the middle, bottom, etc. you can see the distribution exends across nearly the full range of teams from both conferences.  Nothing on the field to show your CONFERENCE is stronger, while an idiot almost as big as you might point to the opposite being true (I say almost as big an idiot because they would be looking at more than a couple of games).

In short, YOU'RE AN IDIOT WHO HASN'T A CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, you know nothing of what you spend your Saturday's watching, and the results on the field of play Prove It.

You can scramble to find some other stats to inflate your claim, but this is sports, and there is no truer statement than an apples to apples comparison of heads up competition.  Period.  It's a better testament that the polls, the Vegas line, or the 3 or 4 games (or fewer) you might site.

I'm not just doing this to harass the SEC fans.  You would find the same no matter which 2 of the major conferences you compared.  I once ran across a guy pushing for the Big East to loose their BCS spot - a similar analysis showed they were at or near .500 against the other major conferences after the departure of Miami and BC.  Welcome to recruiting in the age of affordable air travel and cable TV.

Let me be the one to break the news to you - if your team is mediocre in their current conference, over a 3 year time span they would be just as mediocre in any of the other 6 major conferences.  You need to find something else to make you feel good about your team.  That's not my opinion - that's how the conferences played out on the field when you compare apples to apples.

5. Why OSU got Clobbered in the 2006 NC Game

the details were a long time coming.  Few on either team gave details.  Curse me for not cutting and pasting the article, because I can't find it now, but here is the jist of it in a nutshell.

The article interviewed an Indiana backup QB who's father, a Florida assistant coach, was tasked scouting OSU in the event of a bowl match-up.  While watching an OSU game over the phone, the Florida coach was calling out the plays, pass or run, with 100% accuracy.  He was calling this based on 2 aspects - the OSU formation, and the player's stances.  The OSU offensive coaches had fallen into a pattern of running out of some formations, passing out of others.  Where they did both from the same formation, the players stances provided the rest of the equation.

For the game they introduced defensive audibles.  When the tells showed OSU was passing, the defensive backed up in double coverage and the linemen rushed.  When the tells showed OSU was running, the defensive played up and the linemen filled the holes.  The result - whatever play OSU ran, the defense was there first.  If you know this, you're going to look VERY fast.

On defense, OSU deployed a plan to give Florida the short gains, taking away the big plays.  It was generally successful in its intent (Florida didn't have a lot of big plays), but Florida responded they way they should - they took the short passes and patiently marched the field.

Before anyone screams, I am not saying the final result would have changed, but I am saying it wouldn't have been a route.  Further evidence: I was going to get tickets until I found out who OSU was playing.  It is not that I thought Florida was an unbeatable team, I just didn't like the match ups between offenses and defenses - all of OSUs weaknesses were Florida's strengths - so I wisely pocketed my money.

To summarize, aside from matching up poorly against the strengths of Florida, you can place this loss squarely on the shoulders of the OSU coaches with their predictable offense formations, and a poor defensive scheme they failed to change as the game progressed.  Add some kudos to the Florida coaches, not only for decoding and installing a defense to take advantage of OSUs pattern, but also for adjusting on offense and taking the plays OSU was willing to give.

Need more?  That year the big 10 was 3-1 against the SEC, including wins by #3 Wisconsin over #2 Arkansas, and #5 PSU over Div #2 Tennessee.  Florida wasn't just a big win, it was the only win.

6. Why OSU lost the 2007 NC game

It wasn't suppose to be OSUs year.  They weren't supposed to be playing for the title yet.  They were an extremely young team (11 FR/SO starters, only 4 seniors on the 1^st 2 strings combined) and they played like it.

*Early 1^st, 2^nd and 5 on LSU 10, LSU 0 OSU 7     False start penalty makes it 2^nd and 10, OSU settles for field goal.  Remember this...

*End of the 1^st LSU 3 OSU 10     OSU punts.  LSU fumbles, recovers on their 15.  Since LSU didn't start with good field position, OSU spots them 30 yards committing 2 personal fouls as LSU ties the game.

*Early 2^nd, Score 10-10, 3^rd and 3 on LSU 21     Boeckman throws a perfect strike to Robiskie in the corner of the end zone, the corner gets his fingers on the ball, and Robiskie drops.  The field goal is blocked.  LSU recovers at the 34 and scores on the next drive.

*Late 2^nd, Score 17-10, 1^st and 10 on OSU 31     Boeckman under throws, LSU intercepts and returns to the 24, and later scores.

*Early 3^rdScore 24-10, 3^rd and 23 on LSU 40     OSU forces the punt, gets call for roughing the punter.  LSU takes the 2nd chance and scores, helped along by another personal foul.

OSU gets a gift when LSU throws an interception, later scores on the drive to keep them in the game.

*Early 4^th, Score 31-17, 3^rd and 4 on LSU 28     Place the fault of blowing 1 last chance on the coach.  This is 4 down territory and 4 yards the way this game was playing out says run twice for the 1st down.  OSU passes and Boeckman is sacked.  Remember that field goal instead of a touchdown on the 1st drive, and the block field goal?  It killed the idea of a field goal here.  On 4th and 7 OSU runs a 2 receiver route, LSU covers, OSU fumbles, and LSU gets the ball on the 46.

The game is effectively over as each team scored meaningless touchdowns

Pick 1 or 2 of the 6 "*" above and it's a game in the 4th, pick 2 or 3 and the outcome might have been different.  Pick none and it's a 14 point loss.

The more I read this, the more amazed I am it was still a game early in the 4th.  You don't give up that many scoring chances against anyone and expect to still be in the game, let alone the title game.

Other than the 1st field goal, OSU did everything but hand wrap each LSU scoring drive with a yellow bow and Tiger print wrapping paper

1. commit 30 yards in penalties on drive that started on the 15, shortening the drive to 55 yards.

2. blocked field goal, LSU recovers on the 34.  At 66, it's the longest LSU TD scoring drive.

3. bad interception, LSU returns to 24

4. roughing the punter gives 2nd chance near mid field

5. fumble on bad 4th down play calling, LSU recovers on 46

Even with these, a gift interception gave OSU a chance to pull within 7 early in the 4th.  2 bad plays killed that idea

Flat out, LSU capitalized, OSU played like a bunch of underclassmen over their heads because, well, they were a bunch of under classmen over their heads.

LSU had the speed advantage in CB over WR, OSU had the speed advantage in run blocking and TB.  Feel free to perpetuate the speed myth - I loved seeing the expressions on the Florida faces against Michigan (a team nobody in the Big 10 considered measurably faster) and will love seeing it again.  Michigan-Florida 2007 could be a wake up call, or it could be another round of hype.

7. OSU made the NC game in 2007 because of an Easy Schedule

If you didn't like hearing the above, you're really gonna hate hering this.

The OSU players and fans ended the season celebrating a win over their rivals and a chance to loose to USC in the Rose Bowl.  My comment at the time was that I would rather play anyone anywhere than USC in Pasadena, and to this day it still is.  Circumstances sent them to the NC game.

If you loose 2 games, you don't expect to play for the title.

All but 6 teams lost their chance because they didn't win a major conference.

VT showed rather convincingly they weren't at LSUs level, getting pummeled early in the season.

USC lost to Stanford, a team that was destined to finish dead last in the PAC 10 until they got the upset.

WVU lost to Pittsburgh, a team that finished next to last in their conference.

Oklahoma lost to Colorado, a team destined to be bowl ineligible until they got the upset, and Texas Tech, a team destined to finish next to last in their division until they got the upset.

Inflate Stanford, Pittsburgh, and even Colorado and Texas Tech all you want - the truth is these teams weren't going to finish in the top 1/3 of any major conferences in 2007.

USC, WVU, and Oklahoma didn't miss the NC game because they played a tough schedule or lost to good teams.  They missed because they couldn't maintain the same high level of consistent play they demonstrated against better teams when they played lesser teams (no injury should have evened USC with Stanford).  If you loose to a team destined to finish in the bottom 2 of your conference/division, you probably won't play for the title.

Get used to it - when you routinely challenge for your conference's title, everyone is gunning for you.  You either keep up the level of play or risk the huge upset.  Bashing other conferences and teams won't improve your lot.  You gotta place the blame (and pressure) to maintain a high level of play on the responsible person, the head coach, or live with something less.

Columbus knows all about that.  They took a lot of criticism for the pressure they placed on Cooper and Bruce to instill an attitude to win consistently (I can recall from 20+ years ago when it wasn't uncommon for a player to get a game suspension for drinking the night before a game), but the result was they did get a consistent coach who has 5 losses in 3 years, 3 to the National Champions, 2 to teams that shared the top 2 spots of the conference with the Bucks.  If USC, WVU, Oklahoma, or a long list of other teams that didn't win their conference had done this, they would have played for the NC in 2007.  Period.

OSU made it to the NC game despite their soft schedule, not because of it.  It was an unusually weak year for OSU's non-conference schedule.  They were near the last if not the last undefeated team from a major to be ranked in the top 2.  They were dropped to the bottom of the list of 1 loss teams after Illinois.  They made it to the NC game only because every other conference champion had 2 losses.  Tressel's consistency put them in position 1 to 2 years early.  Other's inconsistency put them in the game.

LSU made the NC game because they were the only conference champion to have beaten the champion from another major conference, had the closest losses of the 2 loss teams, and achieved this with a rash of injuries that would have crippled most other teams (and in many cases, did).

When you consider it was still a game in the 4th after OSU made a LONG list of mistakes, both OSU and LSU should probably be happy USC and WVU shot themselves in the foot while Missouri fell short given their bowl performances.

Here's another dose of reality - A 2 loss team in the title game was the exception, not a new rule.  If you're not a conference champion, you won't get invited.  If you win your conference but have 1 loss, a no loss champion will get the invite ahead of you.  The same goes for 2 losses vs 1 loss.  Winning against another top team (such as the winner of USC/OSU in 2008) will get you an inside lane to the NC game, but it won't forgive a loss.  Try and schedule light, you risk having a team with an equal record but a tougher non-conference schedule get the bid ahead of you.  Simple truth - this is sports - win or don't get invited.

8. Perspective

I will use an extreme example, but all of you have encountered these people, and a few of you might even be one of these.

After the earlier BCS bowls and before the NC game, while perusing the TDs I stumbled across a female fan who was claiming to be so disenfranchised with NCAAF that she was swearing off the sport.  She was disappointed her team wasn't playing for the NC, and disappointed the team she hated (OSU) was playing in the NC game, even though after some inquiries she could not name a more deserving team (I didn't have to give reasons against other teams, I just listed the viable candidates - she provided the reasons).

What's worse - her favorite team - USC!  Despite 2 losses, her team had once again won their conference, got a bid to the Rose Bowl, posted an extremely impressive showing against Illinois, was a shoe in to finish in the top 5 in the voting polls, and was already considered a favorite for the conference and NC in 2008 - and she felt disenfranchised?

My advise was simple - get some perspective or leave - all college sports.  Period.  If you can't be happy with USCs success, you can't be happy being a fan of any college football team.  There'ss more to root for than NC games.  If this is your perspective, you have no business watching college sports.  It is 1 thing to demand perfection from professional adults, it's another to expect it from amateur teenagers and early 20 somethings.

Perhaps she could learn from the team and fans she hated so much that it was overshadowing the fact her team again posted a great season. They started the season predicted to finish 4^th in their conference.  A quick glance at all the under classmen on the roster had Buckeye fans thinking 4^th was optomistic.  When they found themselves in the NC hunt they were ecstatic.  When they lost that chance in a game against Illinois they were still happy with how much better their team had finished compared to what they expected - in all honesty they would have been happy with a top 4 conference finish.  They ended the season celebrating a win over their rivals and a chance to loose to USC in the Rose Bowl (I would have rather played anyone anywhere than USC in Pasadena).  Meanwhile, she felt disenfranchised after USC's season and 2008 outlook?

Again, what she needed was to learn some perspective from the fans of the teams she hated so much.

If you even remotely resemble this lady, don't waste your time with anything resembling an excuse or explanation.

Leave college sports now, as fast as you can log off, randomly change your password, delete all links to college sports related sites, never to return - for your good and the good of your team - leave - because you have completely lost any and all perspective and have nothing of value to add.

9. Haters

In short, suck on it.

In short, you're full of it.

In summary, you have no idea what you're talking about.

At length...

I was recently linked to a blog where a guy was ranting about all the OSU fans claiming to be a shoe in for the NC (never mind he had proclaimed his conference to be the far superior conference(see 4. You're an even bigger idiot, Part 2 above), or that he had proclaimed his favorite team a dynasty based on 4 years results - I am not certain how many years constitute a dynasty, but I thought it was at least 8 or 10).

I did a quick search for blogs related to this.  You know what I found?  None.  Zip.  Zilch.  Zero.  Nada.  Not a single blog in all of Fan Nation where the writer claimed OSU was a shoe in for the NC.  Next I scanned the TDs.  Over 3 days you know how many comments I found?  None.  Zip.  Zilch.  Zero.  Nada.  Not a single comment in every TD in FanNation.  This actually surprised me.  Finally I found some comments in the T&R section - the section everyone peruses that visits SI, even if they don't enter Fan Nation (you can tell by the large number off default icons).  I found a lot saying that if OSU won out, they would play in the NC game again (which would include a win over USC - rather realistic claim).  Going back 2 months on every NCAAF T&R, (must have scanned 1,000s of comments), I found a few dozen comments left by less than 2 dozen people, making the unqualified claim OSU was going back to the NC.  I am not certain in which world this constitutes ‘Every fan."

By comparison, I did find over a dozen "OSU sucks" "Big 10" sucks, etc. blogs.  I found hundreds of comments to that effect so I quit counting.

I have no doubt that eventually "OSU is a shoe in" blogs and comments will appear, mostly authored by the fringe element of Fan Nation and kiddie members wondering what it will be like to grow pubic hair (isn't there an age limit?).  When it reaches over half a dozen blogs and a few hundred comments, consider it even with the Feb 1^st total of opposite comments.

In the mean time, here's an abvious tell - if the comment is in T&R and the icon is the default, it isn't someone who is part of Fan Nation, it is someone who just reccently signed up to leave a comment about the article.  That should be obvious, but apparently the obvious is beyond the grasp of many.

If that's not enough, read the string of comments.  In most cases I found a long list of preceeding trash talk against the team/conference you love to hate before the retributions piled on... in other words, their comments and your comments are identical in reason of origin - congrats, that can qualify as self loathing and/or projection of your personal flaws on others - take that to your psychologist!

Otherwise, quit blaming your hatred of "Those fans" based on their comments.

It's pretty obvious you are either...

misplacing your disappointment with your team's perennially under performance -or-

you are petty, unsuccessful, insecure, and/or otherwise in such dire need of someone to feel superior to you will exaggerate to create an enemy -or-

your life is void of challenges you are capable of overcoming so you look to the internet for an entity to bash -or-

you're a pliable piece of mush so inclined to suggestion that if you read something 200 times you will take it as the truth -or-

you have no idea what you spend your Saturdays watching -or-

you have lost all perspective and now find yourselves emotionally invoved in hating a bunch of kids and goofs you've never met surfing the net.

If you think the OSU fans feel superior, in 1 area you just might be right - they do think they have a better perspective.  I will give you an extreme example.  I do hate my rival, Michigan, but I still root for them in non-conference games and celebrated their bowl win.  Even more, I felt for their SRs that passed up the pros to come back for 1 more year, because they obviously didn't have a good OSU game, didn't have a memorable season, were clearly injured and dispirited by the OSU game, and dropped their position in the draft playing the extra year.  I even wished Carr had left a year early so he could leave with at least a .500 record against OSU - a guy who recruits and garners player's loyalty like he did has to really connect with his players.  I was sorely disappointed by the outcome of the OSU Michigan game because Michigan played flat - I have come to look forward to the game as a smash mouth brawl from WR to WR.  When I think back, on my list of the top 20 OSU games I have watched was the 1st in the OSU Texas series - a game OSU lost but which was an entertaining well played brawl by 2 perennial powerhouses fighting for a shot at the title.

Either way, I am happy with my life, my team, and I maintain perspective on college sports and the athletes who participate.  I don't know you personally, don't have any desire to, and could care less about the mythical reason you give for hating a team outside your conference.

In short, suck on it.

In short, you're full of it.

In summary, you have no idea what you're talking about.

BTW - This is a blog by Prove It.

I feel no obligation to free speech.

If you leave an idiot comment, I either point out how clueless you are using the facts or just simply zap it - at best it's pointless, at worse you look the fool.

Thank you for reading.  I can't believe you read this far.  Perhaps I'll have a back 9 to blog by season's end.