BCS National Championship: Louisiana State University v. University of Alabama

by Arnaldo

It's the "Rematch" of the "Game of the Century"!  What more could you want out of a National Championship?

Funny to ask since a large minority of pundits and fans would rather see Les Miles' old team, Oklahoma State, try their best against his new team, LSU, but that's behind us so let's focus on the match-up at hand: Nick Saban's old team, LSU, against his new team, Alabama (see what I did there?).  We haven't seen a rematch in the title game since 1996 when Florida beat Florida State, who had previously lost to FSU at the end of the regular season.  That game should inspire hope, in the days before the big game, that we should see the best game college football has to offer, and that anything can happen.  As for the coaches, there's plenty of talent on both sides.  Nick Saban has won two titles with LSU and Alabama, and Les Miles was here four years ago with LSU.

"Umm . . . Awkward?"

Round I: FIGHT!


So how should this game play out?  Well luckily we already saw these teams duke it out.  First of all, let me just say, that game was not boring.  I mean, you may have been bored watching it, but there's nothing boring about a stalemate, the culmination of solid, mistake-free, perfectly coached football.  For most teams, there's a looseness about calling and executing plays when a team usually has a go-to play with a high rate of success.  This wasn't that.  This was 60 minutes of high tension and insurmountable anxiety.  Neither coach could call the wrong play; neither group of players could make a single mistake, the other team would capitalize.  When you have two teams with great offenses but phenomenal defenses, this is the type of game you're gonna see.


Round II:  FIGHT!

For those of you who did think the first match up was boring, you should be pleasantly surprised with this National Championship game.  There should be more scoring this time.  These teams have an advantage most college football teams never have: extensive experience against each other.  Watching film on your opponent's last match up is one thing; having actual experience is a whole 'nother game.  These coaches have footage on how exactly each player should match up against their assignment.  They don't have to estimate how to give their offensive/defensive line the edge, they don't have to look at 40-times to match up receivers on defensive backs.  They were already there.  Unlike the NFL, college teams very rarely play each other more than once, and players are constantly moving around; having actual field time against the opponent is a Christmas gift neither Nick Saban nor Les Miles will take for granted.  This should translate to slightly more success on offense for both teams.  Look at the NFL where teams have to play their three divisional rivals twice per season.  Nine out of ten times, the second game will be higher scoring than the first.  Each team will be more confident on the success of their plays and will be a bit more liberal with their play-calling.  Expect to see a few more long passes and at least two more touchdowns than before.

On the opposite side of the coin, each coaching staff knows what the other team is studying, and know what didn't work the first time around.  As a result, expect plays, coverages, and especially blitzes you've never seen from each team before.


Keys to Victory


For LSU, it's one word: consistency.  Les Miles prides himself on consistency, but something is getting lost in translation.  LSU is undefeated because of three things: near-perfect defense, near-perfect special teams, and a stellar offensive line, but LSU is not a perfect team.  There is a severe lack of consistency in the offense, namely the skill positions.  They're quick fix has been their depth.  Two quarterbacks (though expect much more, if not all Jordan Jefferson over Jarret Lee), five runningbacks, constantly in rotation.  When one guy drops the ball (both literally and metaphorically) Miles just sends in his replacement.  It's like covering holes with duct tape; it's not a real fix.

CB Tyrann Mathieu

As an offense, LSU is hot and cold.  They've gotten away with being so inconsistent because the defense gives them infinite opportunities and their special teams gives them favorable field position, or touchdown returns.  The problem is that eventually, and against the top defense in all major categories in Alabama, all cylinders have to click, or the entire game will break apart.  They beat Alabama the first time because they were hot.  Against Georgia, they were cold.  The first half of the SEC Championship game saw an LSU offense that could produce zero first downs and -2 yards.  Now, Georgia's defense is good, but Alabama's is the best.  A performance like that will not be forgiven next Monday and will result in a steady field position battle that Alabama can easily win.  Expect a good battle in the trenches between LSU's offensive line and Bama's defensive front.  LSU likes to run the ball a lot whether it's from the I to Singleback and a good amount of spread option.  Either way, a strong (and always consistent) offensive line and five effective and healthy running backs will deliver a solid run game.  If LSU wins, however, the difference maker will be special teams.  With one of the best punters in the nation and definitely the best punt returner in the nation (Tyrann Mathieu), LSU's special teams has the ability to inch their team closer to the endzone on each possession transition.  Make no mistake, the field position battle will be THE most important in this game.


For Alabama, it all goes back to Nick Saban.  Love him or hate him, there's no smarter coach in football, and with him comes a big strategic advantage: his team didn't have to play on championship week and LSU's offensive holes were severely exposed against Georgia's defense in the first half.  You can bet Nick was licking his lips watching the golden footage while his team gets an extra week to rest.  Alabama needs to limit Jordan Jefferson to either the pass or run game.  Alabama's defense is first in every major category so it should be pretty easy to stop the weak passer.  With LSU focusing on their powerful run game, they'll need to use their outside option game to widen the box to set up good interior runs.  Alabama's only weakness is outside linebacker speed and defending the option (they allowed 307 run yards against the triple-option FCS Georgia Southern).  In their last meeting, LSU was very capable of moving the ball on outside speed options.  Look for Saban to keep his linebackers a little more spread out and prepared for outside options.  There may also be less use of a true Buck (hybrid linebacker/defensive end).  Either way, Saban will be out to turn LSU into a one-dimensional offense.  One-dimensional teams do not win against Nick Saban.

RB Trent Richardson

On offense, expect a lot, a lot, of Trent Richardson.  LSU may have a better offensive line, but not by much, and they don't have a Trent Richardson.  My personal pick for the Heisman, he's more than a runningback.  He's an all around athlete.  He's their leading rusher, obviously, with 1583 yards, but is also curiously Alabama's second highest receiver with 327 yards.  That's not a lot for a receiver, but having a do-it-all player on the field opens up all sorts of possibilities.  Throwing good screens, checkdowns, and underneath patterns to a talented runningback is like running a spread offense.  It'll force a defense to spread out into looser zones, and make bigger passing lanes for Marquis Maze, and also even more running lanes for Trent Richardson.  As I mentioned, special teams will play a huge part of this game and Alabama will be prepared.  They don't have the same return game as LSU, but they will be well prepared for Tyrann Mathieu and company.  On punts, look for Alabama to sacrifice punt blockers to suffocate Mathieu and force him to fair catch.

Arnaldo's prediction:

Alabama beats LSU 20-10

Gone Bowling: University of Georgia vs. Michigan State University

Free Bloomin' Onions for everyone!

by Dub

Throughout the coming weeks, B&A will be going through some of the SEC bowl game match-ups and giving you, the fans, a little bit of background for both the teams playing. I don't know about you, but when bowl season starts, I usually try to catch a little bit of each one, and would like to know a little more about key players on each team, and some of the background of the two teams playing. That being said, let's get started with our first Gone Bowling Match-up: UGA vs MSU.

For our first match-up, we have what look like two very good but not elite football teams. Both are 10-3 and played in their respective conference championship games. The difference between these two teams is that Georgia is the fourth best team in the SEC (first almost anywhere else), and MSU is the second best in the Big 10. What really gets a lot of MSU fans is that Michigan (a 10-2 team that did NOT play in its conference championship game and was beaten head to head by MSU) is going to a BCS bowl, simply for the fact that they did not lose an extra game to Wisconsin.

Georgia is excited to be going to the Outback Bowl, because they have a young team who will likely finish in the top 15 this year, and have a load of returning players, namely Aaron Murray (QB), Isaiah Crowell (RB), and Malcolm Mitchell (WR) who all lead the team in their respective categories. Michigan State is losing both their #1 quarterback and #1 wide receiver, and will likely not be this talented of a football team when Bowl Selection rolls around next December. The point here is that Georgia is a fiery, scrappy team who still has a lot of time left to improve, and is chomping at the bit to get into the bowl, and Michigan State is a team who feels like they were cheated out of "real competition". Now the issue is that when you think the opponent you're facing against isn't up to your level, often times, you let him run right up to you and punch you straight in the face.

Georgia is a team loaded with talent, and the only reason they aren't playing for a BCS bowl is that three other teams in the SEC could all win a national title, playing against anyone else in the nation. This season, Georgia had a front-loaded, painful schedule against two top 12 opponents, which set them back 0-2 right off the bat. They reeled off 10 straight on their way to Atlanta to face eventual SEC Champion LSU. The issue with Georgia isn't the players they have or the schemes they run. The issue is youth, and with youth comes inexperience. LSU was built for the long haul from day 1; when a player went down, another took his place, and played at an All American level. Georgia was decimated by injuries by the time they locked horns with LSU, and it showed.

Michigan State is a team that lost a head scratcher to Notre Dame in September by three scores. Then again, one might look at a schedule from the past couple of years and realize that MSU has lost a game to an unranked opponent early in the season for three out of the last four years. When you don't play in a hyperconference where everyone and their mother is ranked in the top 25, you don't have the strength of wins to be a two loss team and skyrocket through the BCS rankings to play in a big time bowl. Michigan State was blown out by Nebraska by three touchdowns, got it back together, and then lost by a field goal to Big 10 Champion Wisconsin. However, MSU did have big regular season wins over #6 Wisconsin and #11 Michigan. Michigan State doesn't have issues with talent, but with consistency, and unfortunately, they play consistently bad during bowl season against SEC teams.

Now we'll go through and look at three players to look at as these teams meet in January.


Georgia

• Jarvis Jones #29 LB: His 13.5 sacks are good enough for 2nd in the nation, and he is an absolute monster at disrupting the comfort and poise of the opposing QB. Fast getoff, great balance and technique, and a speed rush that could leave even the best offensive lineman dizzy.
• Bacarri Rambo #18 S: An absolute ballhawk who rarely let a big play develop. His 7 picks this year are, like Jones, good enough for 2nd in the nation. He's got a nose for the ball, and he takes advantage of QB mistakes.
• Aaron Murray #11 QB: Passed for 2861 yards and 33 touchdowns, which broke the UGA single season mark of 25 set by Matt Stafford in 2008. Murray is an undersized quarterback who plays a lot like Drew Brees, making up for lack of size in arm strength and timing. Look for him to utilize his tight ends, Charles and Bennett.

Michigan State

• Kirk Cousins #8 QB: Cousins is as good a quarterback as there is in the Big 10 and holds the MSU career passing touchdown record at 62. He's got good arm strength and good anticipation, which leads to a number of good plays against lazy defenses. Look for him to work the pro sets he has in this game, and to be rolling out of the pocket, as he'll be feeling the pressure of UGA's pass rush. The good news is that he is as deadly on the rollout as he is in the pocket.
• Denicos Allen #28 LB: This season, Allen has 10 sacks, and plays a similar style to Jarvis Jones, a speed rushing outside linebacker who disrupts the backfield. He is very athletic, and makes plays that force his opponents to account for him on every down. If you want to see how much of a pure athlete he is, go here.
• BJ Cunningham #3 WR: Cunningham is a big bodied, big play machine. He has 72 catches for 1200+ yards and 12 touchdowns this year, and looks to improve upon those numbers against Georgia's smallish cornerbacks. In order for him and Cousins to have a good game, MSU will need to implement short, quick routes to keep the defense honest and allow the field to open up.

Ultimately, both of these teams are very similar in play style and in ability. Georgia has a bit more of an undersized speedy defense, whereas MSU has a bigger albeit slower defense that relies on sound gap protection to minimize big runs. Both teams are ranked in the top 10 nationally in total defense, and are both top 20 in scoring defense. The series between these two teams is tipped in Georgia's favor, winning 34-27 in the 1989 Gator Bowl and 24-12 in the 2009 Capital One Bowl.

For Georgia to win, they must control the line of scrimmage and force Michigan State to beat them through the air. If one of Georgia's (many) hurt running backs is back for this game, I think UGA wins, propelling themselves into next season with high hopes and a very talented football team.

For Michigan State to win, they must run the ball well against Georgia's very talented front 7. Look for Michigan State to use screen packages and quick pass plays to force Georgia to play off the ball a little bit and give themselves room to run. Michigan State can not win if they cannot establish a run game.

Dub's Prediction: Georgia 37 Michigan State 24

'11-'12 Bowl Game Schedule

by Arnaldo

Here is a comprehensive bowl schedule that's easy to read and all in one place, for those of you that are like me and hate having to go to ESPN.com every time I want to know when there's a game on and who's playing and have to click on a 8 different places.  Enjoy! (click on picture, right-click and save, so you get the high-resolution version.)

3 Reason Why We Can't Live Without the BCS

by Arnaldo

1. There's No Going Back.


The BCS was specifically designed to pit the No.1 and No.2 teams together in a national championship game so there would be no uncertainty about which teams is truly the nation's best.  You may think this is obvious but it really didn't start happening until the BCS was formed in 1998.  Its predecessor, the Bowl Alliance, and its predecessor, the Bowl Coalition, set out to do just that but couldn't get the Pac 10 or the Big 10 involved, which left the Rose Bowl to screw things up for everyone.  The result was the opposite of the goal.

...AM I RIGHT?!

The game of the century...

Loyal Gator fans may remember that in 1996, No.3 Florida played in the Sugar Bowl against No.1 Florida State because No.2 Arizona State was locked into the Rose Bowl with No.4 Ohio State.  Because of the Rose Bowl's refusal to lose one of its big money-making tie-ins, the national champion would have to be somehow sifted out of that mess.  Luckily, Arizona State fell to the Buckeyes while the Gators exacted revenge over Florida State for its embarassing loss just a month before, leaving no ambiguity as to whom should be crowned national champions.

College football wasn't always so lucky however.  Just the following year, No.1 Michigan was locked into the Rose Bowl against No.8 Washington State while the Bowl Alliance dubbed their "national championship match" No.2 Nebraska versus No.3 Tennessee.  No matter how decisively Michigan beat Washington State, they would still have to share the national championship with Nebraska.  Six years after setting out to match up No.1 and No.2, these systems only accomplished such match-ups three times.  Naturally, this left way for the BCS to form, kick the Rose Bowl in the ass and tell them to cut it out, and introduce computer formulas as part of their ranking system.

I bet Power T misses those days.

2. Coaches Can't Be Trusted, but Computers Can.


If you don't know the following names, you probably should: Jeff Sagarin, Jeff Anderson and Chris Heston, Richard Billingsley, Wes Colley, Kenneth Massey, and Peter Wolfe.  They're the seven most important men in college football, I don't care what ESPN says.  If the BCS were a medieval secret society, these men would be the council of elders.

Like this, but nerdier... ok, less nerdy.

They are the creators of the six computer formulas that make up a third of the BCS rankings and when compared to the other thirds, the Harris Interactive Poll, which is made up of a randomized 115 voters, or the USA Today Coaches' Poll, which is comprised up of only 59 of the 120 FBS head coaches, they clearly hold the most power.  Of course, however, they don't actually pick which teams they think are best.  Instead, these men create the six (two are a duo; adorbs, I know) formulas and algorithms that determine which teams are.  Needless to say, they are incredibly smart; two of them hold Ph.D.s (one in astrophysical sciences from Princeton).

But don't worry, they're not actually hell-bent on dominating college football with lairs of super computers and lab equipment (a disappointment, I'll admit).  Most of them haven't even met each other.  The egos alone would be too much to handle, claims Billingsley, and all of their formulas have fundamental disagreements, such as home field advantages, particular effects from strength of schedule, and how exactly to calculate early season versus late season game significance.  The point is that these formulas level one another out.  Also, keep in mind that the highest and lowest score for each team is thrown out.  What they do best is keep those cynical coaches in line.

Why are they cynical you ask?  Go to Les Miles' office and candidly ask him who he thinks is the best team in the nation.  No doubt he'll say his own team, and he clearly has the right to do so.  Now go ask Nick Saban.  He'll probably also say his own team, and he, too, has all the right to do so.  Now go ask Houston Nutt.  Hopefully he wouldn't say his 2-8 Rebels but to be honest, if I were in his position, I'd sure as hell would.  It's only natural to be a bit biased, and the same goes to all those former players and coaches voting in the Harris Poll.

Univesity of Oklahoma = OU?

To throw some proof into my argument (some people still use "proof"), go back to the 2008 college football season.  The No.2 Gators were pitted against No.1 Oklahoma Sooners, the team that despite being in a 3-way tie with Texas and Texas Tech for the Big 12 South, had one of college football's most successful offenses scoring a whopping 52.9 points per game.  Florida held them to only two touchdowns winning 24-14, beating two top ranked teams back-to-back.  No one questioned that the Florida Gators were the best team in the nation... except for one prick.

You mean this powerhouse?

Kyle Whittingham, Utah head coach, finished his season undefeated with a Sugar Bowl victory over Alabama and annoucned publicly he would vote his team No.1 and to hell with the consequences.  The catch is that the American Football Coaches' Association requires all coaches to vote the winner of the BCS National Championship Game No.1 in the final Coaches' Poll.  I'm not sure if he was fined, but I assume there was a reprimand of some sort (no one cared enough to write anything about it).

The point is that the computers serve as a check and balance for the human voters, much like the American Constitution does for our government, and you support America don't you?



3. To Play-off or Not to Play-off . . . The Answer's "Not". 


The simplest way to settle any multiplayer competition is with a tournament, there's no disagreement there.  The problem is that college football isn't at all simple, and the road to simplicity is paved with millions and millions of dollars that aren't yours and aren't going anywhere.

Like this, but green and not as happy.

In theory, with 120 FBS teams, you could have a seven game play-off with a few first round byes and then EVERYONE has a shot for the naitonal championship (I'd like to see President Obama's bracket then).  But doing so means teams would have to travel across the country every other week, fans would have to follow them, and rivalries would diminish.  After all, you can't sustain a rivalry if you don't play that team often.  Of course, some rivalries have been established for over a century, so diminishing said rivalries could result in a hot steaming mess of hostility.

Obviuosly this is an extreme case and a likely play-off system wouldn't exceed eight teams.  This would call for 3 extra games between the conference championship games and the national championship.  the problem here is that there is already an extensive system in place that also isn't going anywhere: bowl games.  One possible solution is the use bowl games as play-offs.  This couldn't be more disastrous in my mind.  I already mentioned how reluctant (and stupid) the Rose Bowl has been to loosen its conference tie-ins for the good of college football.  This idea would require almost all bowl games to lose their tie-ins and diminish in value altogether.  Bowl games make money from television deals and butts in seats at stadiums.  These butts sit down because it's there team's last game.  Say you're an LSU alumnus right now, but in this proposed play-off system, and say you had a good living with a moderate income.  Your team has to play in Atlanta, and then three other places before it can get to New Orleans for the national championship.  How many of these expensive trips would you be willing to make?  Maybe one if it's close, but the realistic answer is that you're gonna hold up for the big 'Ship.  Who wouldn't?  The good people who run these tgames and the not-so-good people who televise them know this.  The coaches and teams don't want to play more games, and the institutions will never let this radical new idea cut into their regular season revenue.

You mad, bro?

Also consider this, what happens to the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, and all the other classic bowl games we've been watching for over a century?  They become stepping stones for the national championship.  The winner of the national championship would also be the winner of the Sugar Bowl, and the Rose Bowl, or whatever game was used as a play-off.  Where do you think that Sugar Bowl trophy goes in the trophy room?  Probably somewhere behind the Coaches' Trophy they won a week later.  And the prize money?  Are we gonna let one team clean house on all the $17 million payouts these games award?

You mean the Franklin American
Mortgage Company Music City Bowl
will keep its prestige? Thank God!

I once devised a system that in my opinion is the closes thing to a feasible play-off.  It's a play-off plus bowl game.  The top eight teams go into a home/away seeded play-off (more money for the schools instead of the BCS), where the losers of each level get selected to a major bowl game to be played the same week as the following play-off, with a bye before the national championship game.  All other bowl games are selected as usual.  This makes a win-win situation (at least financially) for everyone.  There are more games to be televised, the universities make more money hosting games, and the major bowl games are only slightly diminished.  They would, after all, be a loser's bracket in this scenario.



The reason I don't agree with (even my own) play-off system is mostly because of the potential for a loss of pageantry.  Any team should be excited to be in a major bowl game.  It should be hard to get there.  The idea of making them a loser's game changes the entire perception for hungry teams.  If you don't believe me see 2008 Alabama.  They lost to Florida in the SEC Championship and entered the usually prestigious Sugar Bowl with nothing to play for and lost to a non-automatic qualifier, Utah (as I mentioned before).  Sure Florida went into the same scenario the next year and won by quite a margin, but not all teams are coached the same, and not all teams play just for the sake of playing the game.  Also, there's the clinch problem.  Now, because there isn't a guaranteed clinch in this system, this shouldn't be a big or frequent problem, but it could still happen.  This year's LSU team could sit their starters, lose to Georgia, and they wouldn't drop below No.8.  Experts are saying they have such a bump over everyone else, they could lose and still go to the national championship at No.2.  Not only is the pageantry of college football being diminished, the conference championship would become completely insignificant in this scenario.

The moral of the story, kids, is that the BCS isn't evil; it's not even a bad idea.  Quite frankly, it's still the best idea we've had in the entire history of college football for crowning a national champion.  Any changes would just bring us closer to the No Fun League (good closing joke, huh?).