Friday, January 06, 2017

Best Bowl? The Peach

Analysis of the bowl games: which ones pitted the best teams, which were the most competitive, which upsets could’ve been predicted. The numbers crunched below shows the obvious: there are too many bowl games.
 
The first number is the combined power rank of the two schools playing in the bowl. The lower the number the better the teams are. This year the Peach Bowl had the two highest ranked teams, according to the USA Today Saragin Power Ranking – higher even than the national championship game.
 
Twenty bowls had an average power ranking of 50 or greater.  Twenty-nine bowls had an average power ranking higher than 25. Would you pay big bucks to watch two teams play who weren’t even in the top 25? Don’t tell ESPN, but it sounds like we have about 30 bowls too many.
 
The second number is the difference between the two teams power rankings. The lower the number, the more competitive the bowl.  Seventeen bowls had a difference less than ten, making for a potentially close game. Fittingly the Rose Bowl difference was only three. The number might’ve come in handy if you were picking bowls and assigning a confidence factor. The higher the number, the greater the confidence factor.
 
Bowl games are hard to predict. Teams in an inferior bowl game may not be motivated to play, not realizing until too late they’re being embarrassed on national TV. Now players leaving for the NFL quit the team before the bowl game. Also players planning on transferring. Some players flunk out and are ineligible. Others violate team rules and are suspended for the bowl game. Injuries also factor in. Higher ranked Navy went into their bowl without their starting quarterback, and lost. Higher ranked Pitt lost their star QB and RB during their bowl, and lost.
 
Both LSU and Stanford had star running backs quit before the bowl, but won anyway. Louisville’s Lamar Jackson continued the tradition that the Heisman winner struggling in the bowl game.  
 
Of the 41 bowl games so far, the team with the lower power ranking won 19 times. A prime example was #5 Clemson’s pasting of #2 Ohio State. TIP: don’t use the Saragin Power Rankings to pick bowl games (a lesson I should’ve learned years ago). The W below shows the higher ranked team won the bowl game, as it theoretically should have. L means the lower ranked team pulled the upset.
 
315 63 Celebration 189 NC Central 126 Grambling W
254 44 Heart of Dallas 105 Army 149 N Texas W
228 12 Hawaii 108 Middle Tenn 120 Hawaii L
217 09 New Orleans 113 Sou Miss 104 La Lafayette L
194 26 Bahamas 110 E Michigan 84 Old Dominion W
178 64 Arizona 121 S Alabama 57 Air Force W
 
174 22 New Mexico 76 New Mex 98 Tex San Antonio W
146 42 Idaho Potato 94 Idaho 52 Colorado State L
141 77 Miami Beach 109 Cent Mich 32 Tulsa W
136 20 Cure 58 UCF 78 Ark St L
171 13 Dollar General 92 Ohio 79 Troy W
151 55 St Petersburg 103 Miami Ohio 48 Miss St W
 
149 11 Quick Lane 80 Boston College 69 Maryland W
117 33 Armed Forces 42 Navy 75 La Tech L
112 58 Birmingham 27 S Fla 85 SC L
111 43 Cactus 77 Baylor 34 Boise St L
103 60 Military 81 Wake Forest 21 Temple L
 
102 40 Poinsettia 31 BYU 71 Wyoming W
101 21 Gator 61 Kentucky 40 GT W
100 08 Independence 46 NC State vs 54 Vandy W
097 03 Camellia 50 App State vs 47 Toledo L
095 07 Liberty 44 TCU 51 UGA L
 
88 32 Foster Farms 60 Indiana 28 Utah W
79 31 Las Vegas 24 Houston 55 SD St L
75 03 Boca Raton 39 Memphis 36 W KY W
73 13 Pinstripe 30 Pitt 43 Northwestern L
70 20 Belk 25 Va Tech 45 Arkansas W
 
70 04 Music City 37 Tenn 33 Nebraska L
55 21 Sun 38 UNC 17 Stanford W
49 03 Texas 26 Tex A&M 23 Kan St W
48 22 Holiday 35 Minn 13 Wash St L
47 11 Outback 18 Iowa 29 Florida L
 
42 02 Russell Athletic 20 Mia 22 WVa W
29 09 Alamo 19 OK State 10 Colorado L
28 04 Citrus 12 LSU 16 Louisville W
23 05 Sugar 9 Oklahoma 14 Auburn W
22 08 Cotton 7 Wisconsin 15 W Michigan W
 
14 08 Orange 11 FSU 3 Michigan L (above)
14 02 Rose 6 Penn State 8 USC L
07 03 Fiesta 5 Clemson 2 Ohio State L
06 04 Natl Championship 1 Bama 5 Clemson TBD
05 03 Peach 1 Alabama 4 Washington W

No comments: