PiRate Ratings College Football Bowl Preview, Part Three

We are posting three bowl previews this year; this is the third preview.  We will give you the current odds for each game, the PiRate, Mean, and Bias spreads for each game, and the results of our 100 computer simulations for each game.

 

Today, we cover the bowls from January 3 through The BCS Championship Game.   

 

Monday, January 3

Orange Bowl

Miami, FL

8:00 PM EST on ESPN

Stanford (11-1)  vs.  Virginia Tech (11-2)

Vegas: Stanford by 3 ½

Totals: 58

PiRate: Stanford by 7.6

Mean: Stanford by 5.3

Bias: Stanford by 13.7

100 Sims: Stanford 77  Virginia Tech 23

Avg. Sim Score: Stanford 30.4  Virginia Tech 20.9

Outlier A: Stanford 45  Virginia Tech 19

Outlier B: Virginia Tech 33  Stanford 21

 

Tuesday, January 4

Sugar Bowl

New Orleans, LA

8:00 PM EST on ESPN

Ohio State (11-1)  vs. Arkansas (10-2)

Vegas: Ohio State by 3 ½

Totals: 56 ½

PiRate: Ohio State by 3.6

Mean: Ohio State by 2.8

Bias: Arkansas by 4.1

100 Sims: Arkansas 54  Ohio State 46

Avg. Sim Score: Arkansas 26.3  Ohio State 23.7

Outlier A: Arkansas 34  Ohio State 14

Outlier B: Ohio State 27  Arkansas 16

 

Thursday, January 6

GoDaddy.com Bowl

Mobile, AL

8:00 PM EST on ESPN

Miami (Ohio) (9-4)  vs. Middle Tennessee (6-6)

Vegas: Pick’em

Totals: 48 ½

PiRate: Miami (O) by 7.8

Mean: Miami (O) by 6.2

Bias: Miami (O) by 9.7

100 Sims: Miami (O) 64  Middle Tennessee 36

Avg. Sim Score: Miami (O) 35.1  Middle Tennessee 26.5

Outlier A: Miami (O) 41  Middle Tennessee 20

Outlier B: Middle Tennessee 34  Miami (O) 20

 

Friday, January 7

Cotton Bowl

Arlington, TX

8:00 PM EST on Fox Network

L S U (10-2)  vs. Texas A&M (9-3)

Vegas: Pick’em

Totals: 49

PiRate: Texas A&M by 1.8

Mean: L S U by 1.0

Bias: Texas A&M by 6.6

100 Sims: L S U 53  Texas A&M 47

Avg. Sim Score: L S U 25.5  Texas A&M 25.1

Outlier A: L S U 30  Texas A&M 13

Outlier B: Texas A&M 28  LSU 17

 

Saturday, January 8

BBVA Compass Bowl

Birmingham, AL

12 Noon EST on ESPN

Pittsburgh (7-5)  vs.  Kentucky (6-6)

Vegas: Pittsburgh by 3 ½

Totals: 52 ½

PiRate: Pittsburgh by 4.8

Mean: Pittsburgh by 4.7

Bias: Kentucky by 5.6

100 Sims: Pittsburgh 62  Kentucky 38

Avg. Sim Score: Pittsburgh 19.8  Kentucky 16.9

Outlier A: Pittsburgh 27  Kentucky 7

Outlier B: Kentucky 23  Pittsburgh 10

 

Sunday, January 9

Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl

San Francisco, CA

9:00 PM EST on ESPN

Nevada (12-1)  vs. Boston College (7-5)

Vegas: Nevada by 7 ½

Totals: 55

PiRate: Nevada by 12.9

Mean: Nevada by 12.4

Bias: Nevada by 5.3

100 Sims: Nevada 70  Boston College 30

Avg. Sim Score: Nevada 31.8  Boston College 23.6

Outlier A: Nevada 48  Boston College 25

Outlier B: Boston College 31  Nevada 24 (two times)

 

Monday, January 10

B C S  Championship Game

Glendale, AZ

8:00 PM EST on ESPN

Oregon (12-0)  vs.  Auburn (13-0)

Vegas: Auburn by 2 ½

Totals: 74 ½

PiRate: Oregon by 7.8

Mean: Oregon by 2.4

Bias: Oregon by 9.6

100 Sims: Oregon 64  Auburn 36

Avg. Sim Score: Oregon 43.6  Auburn 36.9

Outlier A: Oregon 51  Auburn 32

Outlier B: Auburn 44  Oregon 38 (three others by 6)

8 simulations went to overtime, with Oregon winning seven of those games

Bracketnomics 505–The Advanced Level Class In Bracket Filling

This is a graduate level class that will earn you a Masters in Bracketnomics.  So you want a scientific method to guide you as you fill out your brackets?  You say you want a system that will take out most of the human-bias, and allow you to pick your teams in a mechanical fashion.  Well, we’ve got one for you that has been back-tested and holds up fantastically through the years. 

What the inventor of the PiRate system did was to discover the vital information that has worked in the past.  He’s been using this formula since the Internet made statistics-gathering easy, and it has been back-tested as far back as the days when the NCAA Tournament field consisted of just 23, 24, or 25 teams.

This method will not pick every game correctly and make you an instant millionaire.  It is geared toward finding the tendencies that historically have mattered most in picking the teams with the best chances of advancing.  Not all teams will be a perfect fit in this formula; what this formula does is pick the teams that have the best chance of advancing and making a deep run into the tournament. 

How has the formula performed in recent years?  Last year, it picked Kansas to win the NCAA Championship.  In 2006, it tabbed George Mason as a team to watch to sneak into the Elite 8 (they went to the Final 4).   It correctly selected Florida and UCLA for the Final Four in both 2006 and 2007. 

There have been a couple of seasons where the criteria didn’t apply successfully, but over the course of the 50 seasons, it has performed accurately about 43 times.  Without further adieu, here is the PiRate Bracket-Picking System.

1. Scoring Margin

For general bracket picking, look for teams that outscored their opponents by an average of 8 or more points per game.  Over 85% of the Final Four teams since the 1950’s outscored their opponents by an average of 8 or more points per game. 

Make a separate list of teams that outscored their opponents by an average of 10 or more points per game and a third list of teams outscoring opponents by an average of 15 or more points per game.  More than 80% of the final four teams in the last 50 years outscored their opponents by double digit points per game.  When you find a team with an average scoring margin in excess of 15 points per game, and that team is in one of the six power conferences, then you have a team that will advance deep into the tournament.

This is an obvious statistic here.  If team A outscores opponents by an average of 85-70 and their team B opponent outscores their opposition by an average of 75-70, team A figures to be better than team B before you look at any other statistics. 

In the days of the 64/65-team field, this statistic has become even more valuable.  It’s very difficult and close to impossible for a team accustomed to winning games by one to seven points to win four times in a row.  This average gives the same significance and weighting to a team that outscores its opposition 100-90 as it does to a team that outscores its opposition 60-50.

2. Field Goal Percentage Differential

Take each team’s field goal percentage minus their defensive field goal percentage.  Look for teams that have a +7.5% or better showing.  50% to 42% is no better or no worse than 45% to 37%.  A difference of 7.5% or better is all that matters.  Teams that have a large field goal percentage margin are consistently good teams.  Sure, a team can win a game with a negative field goal percentage difference, but in the Big Dance, they aren’t going to win four games much less two.  This statistic holds strong in back-tests of 50 years.  Even when teams won the tournament with less than 7.5% field goal percentage margins, for the most part, these teams just barely missed (usually in the 5.5 to 7.5% range).  In the years of the 64/65-team tournament, this stat has become a more accurate predictor.  Nowadays, the teams with field goal percentage margins in the double digits have dominated the field.  If you see a team shoot better than 48% and allow 38% or less, that team is going to be very hard to beat in large arenas with weird sight lines.

3. Rebound Margin

This statistic holds up all the way back to the early days of basketball, in fact as far back to the days when rebounds were first recorded.  The teams that consistently control the boards are the ones that advance deep into the tournament.  What we’re looking for here are teams that out-rebound their opposition by five or more per game.  In the opening two rounds, a difference of three or more can be used.

The reason this statistic becomes even more important in mid-March is that teams don’t always shoot as well in the NCAA Tournament for a variety of reasons (better defense, abnormal sight lines and unfamiliar gymnasiums, nerves, new rims and nets, more physical play with the refs allowing it, etc.).  The teams that can consistently get offensive putbacks are the teams that go on scoring runs in these games.  The teams that prevent the opposition from getting offensive rebounds, holding them to one shot per possession, have a huge advantage.  Again, there will be some teams that advance that were beaten on the boards, but over the course of four rounds, it is rare for one of these teams to advance.  West Virginia in 2005 made it to the Elite Eight without being able to rebound, but not many other teams have been able to do so.  There have been years where all four Final Four participants were in the top 20 in rebounding margin, and there have been many years where the champion was in the top 5 in rebounding margin.

4. Turnover Margin & Steals Per Game

Turnover margin can give a weaker rebounding team a chance.  Any positive turnover margin is good here.  If a team cannot meet the rebounding margin listed above, they can get by if they have an excellent turnover margin.  Not all turnover margin is the same though.  A team that forces a high number of turnovers by way of steals is better than a team that forces the same amount of turnovers without steals.  A steal is better than a defensive rebound, because most of the time, a steal leads to a fast-break basket or foul.  When a team steals the ball, they are already facing their basket, and the defense must turn around and chase.  Many steals occur on the perimeter where the ball-hawking team has a numbers advantage.  So, this system counts a steal as being worth 1.33 rebounds. 

The criteria to look for here is a positive turnover margin if the team out-rebounds its opposition by three or more; a turnover margin of three or better if the team out-rebounds its opposition by less than three; and a turnover margin of five or more if the team does not out-rebound its opponents.  Give more weight to teams that average 7.5 or more steals per game, and give much more weight to teams that average double figure steals per game.  A team that averages more than 10 steals per game will get a lot of fast-break baskets and foul shots.  In NCAA Tournament play, one quick spurt can be like a three-run homer in the World Series, and teams that either steal the ball or control the boards are the ones who will get that spurt.

The All-Important R+T Margin: Consider this the basketball equivalent of baseball’s OPS (On Base % + Slugging %).  Here is the PiRate R+T stat: R + (.2S * {1.2T}), where R is rebounding margin, S is average steals per game, and T is turnover margin.  When this stat is 5 or more, you have a team that can overcome a few other liabilities to win.  When the result is 10 or more, you have a team that has a great chance of getting enough additional scoring opportunities to make it to the later rounds.  When this stat is negative, you have a team that will be eliminated before the Sweet 16.

5. Power Conference Plus Schedule Strength

I’m sure up to this point you have been thinking that it is much easier for North Dakota State or Siena to own these gaudy statistics than it is for Pittsburgh or Michigan State.  Of course, that’s correct.  We have to adjust this procedure so that the top conferences get extra weight, while the bottom conferences get penalized.  Here is how we do it.  Look at the Strength of schedule for every team in the Field.  You can find SOS on many websites, such as the RPI at cbs.sportsline.com.  Take the decimal difference for each team in the Field and multiply that by 100.  For example if Team A’s SOS is .6044 and Team B’s is .5777, the difference times 100 is 2.67.  So, Team A’s schedule was 2.67 points (or round it to 3) per game tougher than Team B’s.  Use this in head-to-head contests for every game in your bracket.

These are the five basic PiRate criteria used for the last dozen or so years.  You might be shocked to see that there are some key statistics that are not included.  Let’s look at some of these stats not to rely upon.

Assists and Assists to Turnover Ratio

While assists can reveal an excellent passing team, they also can hide a problem.  Let’s say a team gets 28 field goals and has 21 assists.  That may very well indicate this team can pass better than most others.  However, it can also mean two other things.  First, this team may not have players who can create their own offense and must get by on exceptional passing.  That may not work against the best defensive teams in the nation, or the type that get into the Dance.  Second, and even more importantly, it may indicate that this team cannot get offensive putbacks.  As explained earlier, the offensive putback is about as important as any stat can be.  So, consider this stat only if you must decide on a toss-up after looking at the big five stats.

Free Throw Shooting 

Of course, free throw shooting in the clutch decides many ball games.  However, history shows a long line of teams making it deep into the tournament with poor free throw shooting percentages, and teams that overly rely on free throws may find it tough getting to the line with the liberalized officiating in the tournament.

Let’s say a team shoots a paltry 60% at the foul line while their opponent hits a great 75% of their foul shots.  Let’s say each team gets to the foul line 15 times in the game, with five of those chances being 1&1, three being one shot after made baskets, and seven being two shot fouls.  For the 60% shooting team, they can be expected to hit 3 of 5 on the front end of the 1&1 and then 1.8 of the 3 bonus shots; they can be expected to hit 1.8 of 3 on the one foul shot after made baskets; and they can be expected to hit 8.4 of 14 on the two shot fouls for a total of 15 out of 25.  The 75% shooting team can be expected to connect on 3.75 of 5 on the front end of the 1&1 and then 2.8 of 3.75 on the bonus shot; they can be expected to hit 2.3 of 3 on the one foul shot after made baskets; and they can be expected to connect on 10.5 of 14 on the two shot fouls for a total of 19.35 out of 25.75.  So, a team with one of the top FT% only scores nine more points at the foul line than a team with one of the worst.  That looks like a lot of points to make up, but consider that this is about the maximum possible difference.  Also consider that teams that shoot 60% of their foul shots and make the NCAA Tournament are almost always the teams that also have the top R+T ratings.  Teams that make the NCAA Tournament with gaudy free throw percentages frequently got there by winning close games at the line.  In the NCAA Tournament, fouls just don’t get called as frequently as in the regular season.  The referees let the teams play.  So, looking at superior free throw percentage can almost lead you down the wrong path. 

Ponder this:  The 1973 UCLA Bruins are considered to be the best college basketball team ever.  That team connected on just 63% of its free throws.  They had a rebounding margin of 15.2, and they forced many turnovers via steals thanks to their vaunted 2-2-1 zone press.  In the great UCLA dynasty from 1964 through 1973 when the Bruins won nine titles in 10 years, they never once connected on 70% of their free throws and averaged just 66% during that stretch.

3-point shooting

You have to look at this statistic two different ways and consider that it is already part of field goal percentage and defensive field goal percentage.  Contrary to popular belief you do not count the difference in made three-pointers and multiply by three to see the difference.  If Team A hits eight treys, while their Team B opponents hit three, that is not a difference of 15 points; it’s a difference of five points.  Consider made three-pointers as one extra point because they are already figured as made field goals.  A team with 26 made field goals and eight treys has only one more point than a team with 26 made field goals and seven treys.

The only time to give three-point shots any weight in this criteria is when you are looking at a toss-up game, and when you do look at this stat, look for the team that does not rely on them to win, but instead uses a credible percentage that prevents defenses from sagging into the 10-12-foot area around the basket.  If a team cannot throw it in the ocean from behind the arc, defenses can sag inside and take away the inside game.  It doesn’t play much of a role in the NCAA Tournament.  A team that must hit 10 threes per game in order to win isn’t going to be around after the first weekend.

One Big Star or Two Really Good Players

Teams that got to the Dance by riding one big star or a majority of scoring from two players are not solid enough to advance very far.  Now, this does not apply to a team with one big star and four really good players.  I’m referring to a team with one big star and four lemons or two big scorers with three guys who are allergic to the ball.  Many times a team may have one big scorer or two guys who score 85% of the points, but the other three starters are capable of scoring 20 points if they are called on to do so.  If you have a team with five double figure scorers, that will be a harder one to defend and one that will be consistent.  It’s hard for all five players to slump at once.

We hope this primer will help you when you fill out your brackets this week. 

Now, here is a way to put numbers to the criteria.  It isn’t exactly the way our founder did it every year, but it is a close approximation.

1. Scoring Margin

Award 5 points for every team with a scoring margin difference of 10 or more

Award 3 points for every team with a scoring margin difference of 8.0-9.9

Award 1 point for every team with a scoring margin difference of 5.0-7.9

Award 0 points for every team with a scoring margin difference of 0-4.9

Award -3 points for every team with a negative scoring margin

2. Field Goal % Margin

Award 5 points for every team with a FG% margin difference of 10% or more

Award 3 points for every team with a FG% margin difference of 7.5 to 9.9

Award 1 point for every team with a FG% margin difference of 5.0-7.4

Award 0 points for every team with a FG% margin difference of 0.0-4.9

Award -3 points for every team with a FG% margin difference below 0

3. Rebound Margin

Award 3 points for every team with a Rebound margin difference of 5 or more

Award 1 point for every team with a Rebound margin difference of 3.0-4.9

Award 0 points for every team with a Rebound margin difference of 0-2.9

Award -2 points for every team with a Rebound margin difference below 0

4. Turnover Margin

Award 3 points for every team with a Turnover margin difference of 3 or more

Award 1 point for every team with a Turnover margin difference of 1.5-2.9

Award 0 points for every team with a Turnover margin difference of 0-1.4

Award -2 points for every team with a Turnover margin below 0

5. PiRate R+T Formula

Once again, the formula for R+T is [R + ({.2*S}*{1.2*T})], Where R is rebounding margin, S is avg. steals per game, and T is turnover margin

Award 5 points for every team with an R+T of 10 or more

Award 3 points for every team with an R+T of 7.5-9.9

Award 1 point for every team with an R+T of 5-7.4

Award 0 points for every team with an R+T of 0-4.9

Completely eliminate from consideration all teams with a negative R+T

6. Schedule Strength

Use this to compare when looking at team vs. team.  Take the difference in the Strength of Schedule as given by cbs.sportsline.com and multiple it by 100.  For example, Team A with an SOS of .5252 has a schedule 7 points weaker than Team B with an SOS of .5921.  If these two teams face each other, give the Team B an extra 7 criteria points over Team A ([(.5921-.5252)*100]=6.69 rounds to 7).

If you want to compile all this information yourself, the best way is to go to all 65 official athletic websites of the teams in the Big Dance.  You will find up-to-date statistical information.  Some of these stats are available in other places, but many have been found to be riddled with mistakes, or they are not up-to-date.  All 65 school sites are accurate and timely.

Coming tomorrow (Wednesday), we’ll reveal which teams belong in the later rounds by virtue of having the best criteria scores.

College Football Computer Simulation Playoffs–Championship Game

NCAA 2008 College Football Playoff Simulation

Championship Round

 

Welcome to season number two of the NCAA College Football Playoff Simulation.  For those reading this blog for the first time, the PiRate College Football Playoffs take the champions of the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10, and SEC as automatic qualifiers.  Any of the remaining conference champions (including the top independent) that finish in the top 16 in the final regular season BCS Standings also qualify automatically.  At-large teams are then selected in the order of BCS finish until 12 total teams have been selected.  The 12 teams are seeded by BCS ranking.

 

Here is how the 12 teams were selected for the 2008 playoffs.

 

Top Six Conference Champions

ACC-Virginia Tech 9-4 seeded 12^th

Big East Champion-Cincinnati 11-2 seeded 11^th

Big Ten-Penn State 11-1 seeded 8^th

Big 12-Oklahoma 12-1 seeded 1^st

Pac-10-Southern Cal 11-1 seeded 5^th

SEC-Florida 12-1 seeded 2^nd

 

Automatic Qualifiers By Virtue Of Top 16 In BCS

MWC-Utah 12-0 seeded 6^th

WAC-Boise State 12-0 seeded 9^th

 

Top Four At-Large To Fill Out 12-Team Field

Texas 11-1 seeded 3^rd

Alabama 12-1 seeded 4^th

Texas Tech 11-1 seeded 7^th

Ohio State 10-2 seeded 10^th

 

The PiRate Playoff System uses the top 11 bowl games to play the four rounds.  The 5^th through 12^th seeds must play in the first round, while the top four seeds receive byes to the quarterfinals.

 

The First Round games were simulated Saturday, December 13.  Here were the results of those games.

 

Insight Bowl: #5 Southern Cal 20 #12 Virginia Tech 6

 

Cotton Bowl: #6 Utah 23 #11 Cincinnati 20 2ot

 

Chick-Fil-a Bowl:  #10 Ohio State 45 #7 Texas Tech 31

 

Outback Bowl: #9 Boise State 34 #8 Penn State 23

 

 

Quarterfinal Round Matches

Simulated December 20

 

Fiesta Bowl

#1 Oklahoma 48  #9 Boise State 21

 

Sugar Bowl

#2 Florida 34  #10 Ohio State 17

 

Capital One Bowl

#3 Texas 35  #6 Utah 17

 

Gator Bowl

#5 Southern Cal 17  #4 Alabama 10

 

 

FINAL FOUR

 

Rose Bowl

 

Southern California 27  Oklahoma 14

 

Orange Bowl

 

Florida 49  Texas 35

 

 

National Championship Game

 

Florida 14-1  vs. Southern Cal 14-1

 

AND THE WINNER IS………….

 

Southern California Trojans

 

Final Score:  USC 27  Florida 23

 

Team	1	2	3	4	OT	F
USC	3	10	14	0		27
Fla	6	3	6	8		23
		USC	Stat	Fla
		18	FD	14
		46-148	Rush-Yds	29-77
		239	Pass Yds	223
		19-32-0	Passes	19-35-2
		5-41.8	Punt	6-40.5
		3-46	PR	2-17
		7-60	Pen	6-50
		1-0	Fum	2-1
		68	Play	64
		387	Tot Yds	300

 

USC-Buehler 36 yd. FG, 1^st Qtr. 10:33 (USC 3 FL 0)

Fla-Tebow 4 yd. run, kick blocked, 1^st Qtr. 3:11 (FL 6 USC 3)

Fla-Phillips 29 yd. FG, 2^nd Qtr. 7:55 (FL 9 USC 3)

USC-Turner 17 yd. pass from Sanchez, Buehler Kick 2^nd qtr. 3:09 (USC 10 FL 9)

USC-Buehler 45 yd. FG, 2^nd Qtr. 0:00 (USC 13 FL 9)

USC-Gable 9 yd. run, Buehler Kick, 3^rd Qtr. 12:46 (USC 20 FL 9)

USC-Maualuga 44 yd. interception return, Buehler Kick, 3^rd Qtr. 9:15 (USC 27 FL 9)

Fla-Demps 2 yd. run, 2-point try failed, 3^rd Qtr. 0:54 (USC 27 FL 15)

Fla-Murphy 31 yd. pass from Tebow, Tebow run for 2, 4^th Qtr. 2:27 (USC 27 FL 23)

 

Congratulations go to Southern California for winning the simulated national championship playoffs for the second year in a row!

 

 

The Real BCS Championship Game Simulated 100 Times

 

Florida won 59 of the 100 Simulations by an average score of 36 to 32.

Five of the games went to overtime, with one simulation going four overtimes.  Oklahoma won that one 68-66.

Florida won 11 games by 10 or more points with their biggest margin of victory being 23 points in a 55-32 win.

Oklahoma won three games by 10 or more points with their biggest margin of victory being 19 points at 49-30.

29 of the simulations were decided by three points or less, with Florida winning 15 and Oklahoma winning 14.

 

Regardless of the outcome of this game, there will be discussion that three other teams were just as deserving.

 

If Oklahoma wins this game, Texas has every bit as much right if not more to proclaim themselves champions.  They beat Oklahoma on a neutral field.

 

If Florida wins this game, then Utah has every bit as much right it nor more to proclaim themselves champions.  The Utes beat Alabama by more points than Florida did, and Utah had to play this game as if they were the road team.  Utah won at Oregon State, something that Southern Cal did not do.

 

Speaking of Southern Cal, the Trojans are hands down the best college team in the nation.  Most football experts, including the wise guys in Nevada understand this fact and would list USC as a favorite over any other team.

NCAA 2008-09 College Football Playoff Simulation–Semifinal Round

NCAA 2008 College Football Playoff Simulation

Semifinal Round

 

Welcome to season number two of the NCAA College Football Playoff Simulation.  For those reading this blog for the first time, the PiRate College Football Playoffs take the champions of the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10, and SEC as automatic qualifiers.  Any of the remaining conference champions (including the top independent) that finish in the top 16 in the final regular season BCS Standings also qualify automatically.  At-large teams are then selected in the order of BCS finish until 12 total teams have been selected.  The 12 teams are seeded by BCS ranking.

 

Here is how the 12 teams were selected for the 2008 playoffs.

 

Top Six Conference Champions

ACC-Virginia Tech 9-4 seeded 12^th

Big East Champion-Cincinnati 11-2 seeded 11^th

Big Ten-Penn State 11-1 seeded 8^th

Big 12-Oklahoma 12-1 seeded 1^st

Pac-10-Southern Cal 11-1 seeded 5^th

SEC-Florida 12-1 seeded 2^nd

 

Automatic Qualifiers By Virtue Of Top 16 In BCS

MWC-Utah 12-0 seeded 6^th

WAC-Boise State 12-0 seeded 9^th

 

Top Four At-Large To Fill Out 12-Team Field

Texas 11-1 seeded 3^rd

Alabama 12-1 seeded 4^th

Texas Tech 11-1 seeded 7^th

Ohio State 10-2 seeded 10^th

 

The PiRate Playoff System uses the top 11 bowl games to play the four rounds.  The 5^th through 12^th seeds must play in the first round, while the top four seeds receive byes to the quarterfinals.

 

The First Round games were simulated Saturday, December 13.  Here were the results of those games.

 

Insight Bowl: #5 Southern Cal 20 #12 Virginia Tech 6

 

Cotton Bowl: #6 Utah 23 #11 Cincinnati 20 2ot

 

Chick-Fil-a Bowl:  #10 Ohio State 45 #7 Texas Tech 31

 

Outback Bowl: #9 Boise State 34 #8 Penn State 23

 

 

Quarterfinal Round Matches

Simulated December 20

 

Fiesta Bowl

#1 Oklahoma 48  #9 Boise State 21

 

Sugar Bowl

#2 Florida 34  #10 Ohio State 17

 

Capital One Bowl

#3 Texas 35  #6 Utah 17

 

Gator Bowl

#5 Southern Cal 17  #4 Alabama 10

 

 

FINAL FOUR

 

Rose Bowl

#1 Oklahoma 13-1 vs. #5 Southern Cal 13-1

 

Orange Bowl

#2 Florida 13-1 vs. #3 Texas 12-1

 

RESULTS OF SEMIFINAL GAMES

 

Rose Bowl

 

Southern California 27  Oklahoma 14

 

Team	1	2	3	4	OT	F
Oklahoma	7	0	7	0		14
Southern Cal	10	3	7	7		27
		OKL	Stat	USC
		18	FD	22
		21-77	Rush-Yds	39-148
		282	Pass Yds	267
		25-43-2	Passes	19-33-0
		5-42.4	Punt	4-38.8
		1-9	PR	2-31
		7-60	Pen	5-35
		2-1	Fum	1-0
		64	Play	72
		359	Tot Yds	415

Mark Sanchez threw touchdown passes to Michael Turner on consecutive drives at the end of the 3^rd quarter and beginning of the fourth quarter after Oklahoma had taken a 14-13 lead.  The USC defense held the Sooners to 11 total yards and no first downs in the final quarter, sacking Sam Bradfors twice on 3^rd down plays.

 

Orange Bowl

 

Florida 49  Texas 35

 

Team	1	2	3	4	OT	F
Florida	14	14	7	14		49
Texas	7	14	7	7		35
		Fla	Stat	Tex
		25	FD	19
		39-183	Rush-Yds	18-44
		290	Pass Yds	332
		25-38-0	Passes	27-41-1
		0-0	Punt	3-42.3
		1-12	PR	0-0
		6-44	Pen	8-58
		0-0	Fum	1-0
		77	Play	59
		473	Tot Yds	376

Florida scored touchdowns on their first four possessions, as Tim Tebow started the game 15-18 for 176 yards.  Colt McCoy brought the Longhorns back in the second quarter; trailing 28-7, he led Texas on two quick scoring drives, topping the second one with a nine yard touchdown scamper.

 

With the score tied 35-35, Tebow ran off-tackle 26 yards for the go-ahead score, and then linebacker Brandon Spikes intercepted McCoy and returned it 41 yards for the touchdown that sealed the game.

 

National Championship Game

 

Florida 14-1  vs. Southern Cal 14-1

 

This game will be simulated January 7^th

PiRate BCS National Championship Game Preview and Viewer’s Guide

The NCAA Football Bowl Division BCS Championship Game

Monday, January 7, 2008

8:30 PM EST

Fox Network

New Orleans Superdome

Ohio State 11-1 vs. LSU 11-2

How They Got To New Orleans
Ohio State Buckeyes
Location	Columbus, Ohio
Colors	Scarlet and Gray
League	Big 10 Conference
National Titles (*)	2002, 1968, 1957, 1954, 1942
* Awarded by AP, UPI, BCS, and other official polls
Unofficial Nat’l Titles (%)	1998, 1975, 1974, 1973, 1970,
	1969, 1961, 1944, 1933
% Awarded by various unofficial polls and computers
Head Coach	Jim Tressel
Record at Ohio State	73-15 in 7th season
Bowl Record at OSU	4-2
Overall Record	146-58-2
Offensive Coordinator	Jim Bollman
Defensive Coordinator	Jim Heacock/Luke Fickell
Opponents	OSU	Opp
Youngstown State	38	6
Akron	20	2
at Washington	33	14
Northwestern	58	7
at Minnesota	30	7
at Purdue	23	7
Kent State	48	3
Michigan State	24	17
at Penn State	37	17
Wisconsin	38	17
Illinois	21	28
at Michigan	14	3
Per Game Stats	OSU	Opp
Points	32.0	10.7
First Downs	20.9	12.9
Rushing Attempts	43.6	31.4
Rushing Yards	200.7	77.1
Avg per Rush	4.6	2.5
Rush Yds NFL method *	209.0	99.6
Passing Yards	196.4	148.2
Pass Yds NFL method *	188.1	125.7
Pass Completions	16.3	16.4
Pass Attempts	25.3	31.6
Interceptions	1.0	0.8
Sacks	3.5	1.2
Sack Yards	22.5	8.3
Punting Avg.	40.4	39.2
Punt Returns	38.6	6.8
Net Punting	36.5	33.9
Fumbles-LST	1.4-0.6	1.3-0.7
Penalties-Yds	5.4-40.9	4.1-37.2
Yds per Interception Ret.	17.8	7.4
Avg. Kick Return	17.6	21.4
Time of Possession	32:11	27:49
3rd down conversion %	47.6	30.7
PAT %	97.8	100.0
FG %	81.0	70.0
* The NFL figures QB sacks as lost passing yards and not rushing yards
This is a better barometer of both the rushing and passing games Louisiana State Tigers Location Baton Rouge, LA Colors Purple and Gold League Southeastern Conference National Titles (*) 2003, 1958 * Awarded by AP, UPI, BCS, and other official polls Unofficial Nat’l Titles (%) 1936, 1935, 1908 % Awarded by various unofficial polls and computers Head Coach Les Miles Record at LSU 33-6 in 3rd year Bowl Record at LSU 2-0 Overall Record 61-27 Offensive Coordinator Gary Crowton Defensive Coordinator Bo Pelini Opponents LSU Opp at Mississippi St. 45 0 Virginia Tech 48 7 Middle Tennessee 44 0 South Carolina 28 16 at Tulane 34 9 Florida 28 24 at Kentucky 37 43 3 OT Auburn 30 24 at Alabama 41 34 Louisiana Tech 58 10 at Ole Miss 41 24 Arkansas 48 50 3 OT Tennessee 21 14 Per Game Stats LSU Opp Points 38.7 19.6 First Downs 22.4 16.5 Rushing Attempts 43.3 33.4 Rushing Yards 218.9 103.1 Avg per Rush 5.1 3.1 Rush Yds NFL method * 233.8 122.0 Passing Yards 229.2 180.8 Pass Yds NFL method * 214.3 161.9 Pass Completions 18.2 15.2 Pass Attempts 31.9 32.7 Interceptions 0.9 1.6 Sacks 2.5 2.2 Sack Yards 18.9 14.9 Punting Avg. 43.4 39.2 Punt Return Avg. 5.8 9.5 Net Punting 35.5 36.5 Fumbles-LST 1.2-0.2 1.8-0.9 Penalties-Yds 8.7-64.9 4.6-37.2 Yds per Interception Ret. 11.6 9.5 Avg. Kick Return 20.1 20.5 Time of Possession 32:07 27:53 3rd down conversion % 45.4 36.0 PAT % 100.0 96.7 FG % 78.1 83.3

L S U Offense							Ohio State Defense
Pos	No.	Name	Ht	Wt	Yr	||	Pos	No.	Name	Ht	Wt	Yr
SE	1	Brandon LaFell	6-3	205	So	||	DE	97	Cameron Heyward	6-6	282	Fr
	2	Demetrius Byrd	6-2	195	Jr	||		9	Rob Rose	6-5	294	S0
	28	R.J. Jackson	6-0	205	So	||	DT	84	Doug Worthington	6-7	271	So
LT	70	Ciron Black	6-5	320	So	||		93	Nader Abdallah	6-5	297	Jr
	76	Jarvis Jones	6-7	294	Fr	||	DT	92	Todd Denlinger	6-3	286	So
LG	79	Herman Johnson	6-7	356	Jr	||		72	Dexter Larimore	6-3	304	Fr
	63	Ryan Miller	6-6	302	Jr	||	DE	50	Vernon Gholston	6-4	264	Jr
	62	Robert Smith	6-2	273	Sr	||		78	Alex Barrow	6-5	275	Jr
C	74	Brett Helms	6-2	270	Jr	||	WLB	1	Marcus Freeman	6-2	236	Jr
	63	Ryan Miller	6-6	302	Jr	||		36	Brian Rolle	5-11	212	Fr
RG	65	Lyle Hitt	6-2	299	So	||	MLB	33	James Laurinaitis	6-3	240	Jr
	76	Jarvis Jones	6-7	294	Fr	||		38	Austin Spitler	6-3	234	So
	63	Ryan Miller	6-6	302	Jr	||	SLB	6	Larry Grant	6-3	226	Sr
RT	71	Carnell Stewart	6-5	320	Sr	||		26	Tyler Moeller	6-1	203	Fr
	78	Joseph Barksdale	6-4	310	Fr	||	CB	2	Malcolm Jenkins	6-1	208	Jr
TE	82	Richard Dickson	6-2	235	So	||		32	Eugene Clifford	6-2	191	Fr
	89	Keith Zinger	6-4	250	Sr	||		13	Andre Amos	6-1	179	So
	81	Mit Cole	6-4	260	Sr	||	SS	4	Kurt Coleman	5-11	187	So
FL	9	Early Doucet	6-0	207	Sr	||		3	Jamario O’Neal	6-1	199	Jr
	80	Terrence Toliver	6-5	190	Fr	||	FS	21	Anderson Russell	6-0	205	So
	87	Jared Mitchell	5-11	198	So	||		8	Aaron Gant	6-0	201	So
QB	15	Matt Flynn	6-3	227	Sr	||	CB	20	Donald Washington	6-1	188	So
	11	Ryan Perrilloux	6-3	227	So	||		5	Chimdi Chekwa	6-1	185	Fr
	14	Andrew Hatch	6-3	214	So	||
TB	18	Jacob Hester	6-0	228	Sr	||
	5	Keiland Williams	6-0	226	So	||
	32	Charles Scott	5-11	226	So	||
	8	Trindon Holliday	5-5	160	So	||
	26	Richard Murphy	6-1	197	Fr	||
FB	45	Quinn Jackson	6-2	238	Jr	||
	40	Shawn Jordan	5-11	254	Sr	||
Ohio State Offense							L S U Defense
Pos	No.	Name	Ht	Wt	Yr	||	Pos	No.	Name	Ht	Wt	Yr
WR	80	Brian Robiskie	6-3	196	Jr	||	LE	93	Tyson Jackson	6-5	291	Jr
	12	Dane Sanzenbacher	5-11	178	Fr	||		47	Tremaine Johnson	6-2	282	Jr
LT	75	Alex Boone	6-8	313	Jr	||	LT	72	Glenn Dorsey	6-2	303	Sr
	73	Josh Kerr	6-5	276	Fr	||		97	Al Woods	6-4	315	So
LG	71	Steve Rehring	6-8	345	Jr	||		90	Ricky Jean-Francois	6-3	285	So
	78	Dan Dye	6-3	277	Sr	||	RT	99	Marlon Favorite	6-1	302	Jr
C	64	Jim Cordle	6-4	302	So	||		92	Drake Nevis	6-1	288	Fr
	66	Andrew Moses	6-3	272	So	||		90	Ricky Jean-Francois	6-3	285	So
RG	63	Ben Person	6-4	321	Jr	||	RE	49	Kirston Pittman	6-4	252	Sr
	77	Connor Smith	6-5	317	Fr	||		84	Rahim Allen	6-3	254	So
RT	74	Kirk Barton	6-6	300	Sr	||		90	Ricky Jean-Francois	6-3	285	So
	70	Byrant Browning	6-4	311	Fr	||	SLB	35	Luke Sanders	6-5	242	Sr
TE	88	Rory Nicol	6-5	250	Jr	||		56	Perry Riley	6-1	232	So
	86	Jake Ballard	6-7	255	So	||	MLB	48	Darry Beckwith	6-1	230	Jr
	87	Brandon Smith	6-3	240	Jr	||		54	Jacob Cuttera	6-4	235	So
WR	9	Brian Hartline	6-3	180	So	||	WLB	7	Ali Highsmith	6-1	223	Sr
	4	Ray Small	6-0	182	So	||		11	Kelvin Sheppard	6-3	223	Fr
QB	17	Todd Boeckman	6-5	243	Jr	||	CB	19	Jonathan Zenon	6-0	180	Sr
	11	Robby Schoenhoft	6-6	244	So	||		29	Chris Hawkins	6-1	175	So
TB	28	Chris Wells	6-1	235	So	||	SS	16	Craig Steltz	6-2	209	Sr
	34	Maurice Wells	5-10	195	Jr	||		24	Harry Coleman	6-2	205	So
	3	Brandon Saine	6-1	220	Fr	||	FS	27	Curtis Taylor	6-3	204	Jr
FB	49	Dionte Johnson	6-0	242	Sr	||		44	Danny McCray	6-1	206	So
	16	Trever Robinson	6-0	225	Sr	||	CB	21	Chevis Jackson	6-0	184	Sr
	42	Tyler Whaley	6-1	265	Sr	||		4	Jai Eugene	5-11	184	Fr
L S U Special Teams							Ohio State Special Teams
Pos	No.	Name	Ht	Wt	Yr	||	Pos	No.	Name	Ht	Wt	Yr
K	6	Colt David	5-9	173	Jr	||	K	85	Ryan Pretorius	5-9	175	Jr
P	36	Patrick Fisher	6-5	253	Sr	||	KO	20	Aaron Pettrey	6-1	193	So
KR	8	Trindon Holliday	5-5	160	So	||	P	15	A. J. Trapasso	6-1	224	Jr
	5	Keiland Williams	6-0	226	So	||	KR	4	Ray Small	6-0	182	So
	9	Early Doucet	6-0	207	Sr	||		34	Maurice Wells	5-10	195	Jr
PR	3	Chad Jones	6-3	218	Fr	||	PR	9	Brian Hartline	6-3	180	So
	9	Early Doucet	6-0	207	Sr	||		4	Ray Small	6-0	182	So
LS	51	Jacob O’Hair	6-2	237	Sr	||	LS	56	Dimitrios Makridis	6-1	208	Sr
Hld	15	Matt Flynn	6-3	227	Sr	||		61	Jackson Haas	6-3	228	Sr
	11	Ryan Perrilloux	6-3	227	So	||	Hld	48	Jon Thoma	6-1	199	So

Game Preview

In January of 1973, Ohio State played Southern California in the Rose Bowl and USC blew them off the Pasadena turf much like they did with Illinois this past Monday.  A year later, Ohio State returned to the Rose Bowl for a rematch with USC.  Many pundits expected another Trojan slaughter, but The Buckeyes redeemed themselves with a slaughter of their own by a score of 42-21.

Does history repeat itself?  Ohio State was blown out last year by Florida in the National Championship Game, and now they must take on another SEC team in their home state.  Ohio State has much better odds this time around, as LSU is more of a power team than a speed and finesse team.  Ohio State can hold its own against power teams.

What does play in LSU’s favor is that this is almost a home game for them.  The Tigers receive three points home field advantage, and they already own a win on this field this season.

I expect this to be a game that is slightly biased in favor of defense in the bend but don’t break mode.  I expect both teams to lose good chances to score in this game.

When it comes down to it, LSU coach Les Miles will gamble, while Ohio State coach Jim Tressel will play it close to the vest.  Will LSU’s gambles pay off or be costly?  Will Ohio State be too conservative?  This is where the game will be decided.  I’d say it’s pretty much 50-50, so you should be rewarded with a game rivaling the excitement of last week’s New England Patriots-New York Giants game.

Las Vegas Line:          LSU by 4

Totals Line:                 48½

Money Line:                LSU -165  Ohio State +150

PiRate Computer:     Tossup with predicted score of 24-24 going to overtime

Mean Rating:             LSU 26  Ohio State 25

75 other computers:    48 pick LSU and 27 pick Ohio State

75 computers avg.       LSU by 2.08 points