The Ratings Say Otherwise

I've been pissy over K-State being passed over for a BCS bowl for awhile now, and I'm about to be vindicated. On New Year's I had the fortune to debate the Sugar Bowl selections ad naseum with the University of Detroit Associate Athletics Director (and, more importantly, a U of M alum). While the idea that K-State fans wouldn't come down to New Orleans has been thoroughly debunked, I had no comeback for the television argument (V. Tech and/or Michigan has more national appeal than a better, higher ranked Wildcat team). The discussion then went to non-BCS conference teams, and how the lack of national interest will always preclude them from consideration of BCS participation as well. Yet let's compare this year's games with last year's:

2012 Orange Bowl (West Virginia over Clemson, 70-33): 5.3 rating
In 2011, the Orange Bowl (Stanford over Virginia Tech 40-12) drew a 7.1

-This game was awful. I'm sure it would've had a better rating if Clemson showed up for more than a quarter of play.

2012 Sugar Bowl (Michigan over Virginia Tech, 23-20 in OT): 7.0 rating.
In 2011, the Sugar Bowl (Ohio State over Arkansas 31-26) drew a 9.5.

- Last year's teams had better resumes and featured Big 10(+2) v. SEC rather than Big 10(+2) v. ACC . Notice: Stanford's blow out of V. Tech last year in the Orange Bowl garnered better ratings than Michigan's OT squeaker over the Hokies this year. A BCS bowl game that goes into OT only getting a 7.0 rating? America obviously didn't care about this game.

2012 Fiesta Bowl (Oklahoma State over Stanford, 41-38 in OT): 9.7 rating.
In 2011, the Fiesta Bowl (Oklahoma over Connecticut 48-20) drew a 7.1 rating.

-The 2012 version was a great game. The 2011 version was an awful game. Once again, notice how an awful game last year generated more viewers than an OT game played this year (UM v. V-Tech). Pattern?

2012 Rose Bowl (Oregon over Wisconsin 45-38): 11.8 rating.
In 2011, the Rose Bowl (TCU over Wisconsin 21-19) drew a 13.1 rating.

-The meat of the issue. I will defend to the death the fascination we have in David v. Goliath. TCU won't get a lot of people excited next year when they join the Big 12(-2 or 3). But as a member of the Mountain West, people tuned in to watch them play Wisconsin. A Wisconsin team that was more exciting in 2011 than 2010 with Russell Wilson at QB. A Wisconsin team that played a much more offensively dynamic team in Oregon this year. A Wisconsin team that once again only lost by a possession.

So there you have it. Americans prefer match-ups with good teams in good games. They also have a fetish for good teams that get consistently snubbed by the powers that be due to conference affiliation. You can argue all you want about national branding and alumni support, but that pudding's baked with proof: nobody cared about a very close Sugar Bowl game this year. K-State (and Boise) deserved to be in that game. Unlike V. Tech and Michigan, those two were actually ranked in the top ten.

-Please don't "better resume" me on this. V. Tech beat every ranked opponent they played in the regular season. That would be one team: Clemson. Who they later lost to 38-10 in the ACC Championship game. Clemson then went on to lose to West Virginia (the Big Least’s best team, for what it’s worth) 70-33. Quality win, what?

Michigan, on the other hand, beat half the ranked teams they played this year. That would also add up to one win against a ranked team: #20 Nebraska. Who finished the season with four losses and likely drops from the rankings following their loss in the Capital One Bowl.

K-State's resume doesn't need defending. They played four ranked teams. They beat two, lost to Okie State by one score, and had a bad loss to Oklahoma. Boise State also beat 1/2 ranked teams it played, putting the hurt on Georgia and dropping one to TCU. Oh, and they beat Tech last year.

In conclusion: two teams with crappy rankings were brought in to play in the Sugar Bowl due to their "intangible catchet." One team couldn't even get its fans to buy tickets for the game (which isn't a surprise, given Virginia Tech fans have failed to support their team the last three BCS games they attended. Probably because they hate watching their team lose, which is almost guaranteed, as the ACC has gone 2-13 in BCS games. Did I mention the Sugar Bowl Committee justified its selection by citing Tech's stellar success in past BCS appearances?).

As such I make this (bold?) prediction: tonight's Cotton Bowl (which sold out w/in a week of being announced, b-dubs) will have a better rating than the Sugar Bowl. If not, I'll eat crow, but I highly doubt this will be the case.

The Old Dog Has Tricks - He'll Sure Hunt!

Bill Snyder looks to be proving his worth again. K-State has scored 2 touchdowns to Miami's lone field goal early in the second quarter. He's made Klein the centerpiece of the offense, running the boy around the ends and having him pass all over the field; he's 7 of 9 for 100 yards. Snyder suggested that K-State had only opened 25% of his playbook to-date, and apparently he wasn't lying.

Last year we saw Snyder pulling similar antics at Texas, starting Klein after throwing QB Carson Coffman started all year prior. Klein only completed 4 passes, but we fondly remember the beating the Wildcats put on the Longhorns in 2010 due to Collin's amazing running day. I didn't hate Ron Prince, but Snyder is proving why we named the stadium after him.

In Canada for PopMontreal. Leaving the hotel for bangin' music party. Hopefully we can extrapolate this score for about a 48-12 win. Fingers crossed?

Big XII Conference Tournament Scenarios

K-State's blowout of KU gets a little better every day. After this Saturday's win against Mizzou, K-State looks to be in solid position to secure the fourth bye in the Big 12(-2) tournament (the other three going to KU, UT, and A&M). While the victory over Kansas seemed to give K-State the confidence and direction that kicked off their recent resurgence, it's looking like the game will be a major factor down the road. Here's how the tiebreaker scenario breaks down:

Kansas State and Missouri are both sitting at 8-6 in conference with games left against Texas and Iowa State for K-State, while Mizzou finishes at Nebraska and against KU. Smart money would be for both to finish the season 1-1, tying for fourth in the conference at 9-7. The first tiebreaker, head-to-head, was split as both teams held serve at home and bifurcated the season series.

The next tiebreaker is record against divisional opponents. Kansas State is currently 5-4 in the division, with a game left against Iowa State. A win would leave the Wildcats at 6-4. Missouri sits at 5-3. Assuming they beat Nebraska and fall to Kansas, they would also end the season going 6-4 in the division. Another tie.

The next tiebreaker is record against the DIVISIONAL leader(s). If KU beats Missouri, Mizzou would be 0-2 against the Division Leader. K-State finished 1-1 against KU. So although a win against Texas would be awesome given NCAA seeding implications, it may not be necessary to beat out Missouri in conference. Things are looking up*.

A look at season standings at the time of publication:



*Note: If Mizzou beats KU but loses to Nebraska and both schools are 1-1 against Kansas, the next tiebreaker would be record against the next best school in the division, and so on. This looks to be Nebraska or Colorado. K-State went 0-2 against the Buffs and 2-0 against Nebraska. We need Nebraska to place 4th in the Division and CU 5th. These schools finish the season against each other in a matchup of the traitors. As sickening as it may seem, there's a chance we'll be rooting for Big Red on March 5. Assuming there's a benevolent God, this situation will not manifest itself.

My Metaphors Flow Like Traffic on the Turnpike.

K-State hasn’t beaten anyone good this year. 12-4 Washington State is probably the best win, with Virginia Tech and Gonzaga (both currently 12-5) in the mix. None are ranked. In fact, we’re losing to teams that aren’t that good. Take Florida, who’s best win is over Tennessee (haha – see what I did there?); even teams from a crappy SEC are beating them. Some are calling for the team to refrain from panicking. Personally, I say fucking panic like the roof is on fire.

The Wildcats have fallen from a lofty perch, going from #3 in the nation to 0-2 in conference play. This would understandable (though not excusable) if the conference season started with trips to Lawrence and Waco. It didn’t. It kicked off with a loss to Okie State, followed by a home loss to Colorado. COLORADO! The Buffs got their first victory over a ranked team on the road last night in fourteen years. That losing streak is older than R. Kelly’s next hookup.

Pullen is now on the record as saying he wouldn’t play in the NIT. Once players start thinking NIT, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. After Saturday’s game against Texas Tech the schedule goes: @ Mizzou; @ A&M; vs. Baylor; @ KU. (Aggievillage idiot) Curtis Kelly will make his return against the Red Raiders, and many hope this presence will right the ship. For my sake, I hope it does. Unfortunately, I’m not confident Kelly will ever get his act together, and it’s hard to have faith in a team that claims this is the key to success. Jimmer Fredette or Jared Sullinger being the difference between success and failure I’ll buy. But if Curtis Kelly is your linchpin for victory, you’ve got some serious foundation problems. If the Wildcats were stock, you’d short this in a heartbeat. At least Wichita State is providing some excitement this year. Of course, I refuse to get too high on the Shockers again this year - they’ve broken my heart more times than Stanley Lynch, Benmont Tench, Mike Campbell, and Ron Blair.


(family friendly version)

The Clemente Effect

I'm taking K-State's loss to Florida on Saturday pretty hard, and postpone sleep while thinking what-if. What if Dennis Clemente had one more year of eligibility, how great would the Wildcats be?

I haven't been sold on this team since watching them play. I bought into the preseason hype, but they looked good (not great) against Virginia Tech, ditto against Gonzaga. Then they looked shitty against Duke. Didn't watch'em again during their string of second-tier victories before the Florida game, but game reviews painted their accomplishments as pedestrian. People bemoan the rebounding and grittiness advantage that was on greater display last year, but I look more closely at what Pullen has done.

The point guard just isn't scoring points like he used to. His shooting percentage has been downright atrocious, with games such as 1/12 against Duke, 5/17 against Loyola Chicago, and 2/11 against Washington. He's getting more steals and rebounds while committing fewer personal fouls this season, but just doesn't look as good as last year. Why? The answer lies somewhere over in Israel.

I believe Clemente was that instrumental to K-State's success last year. The NBA didn't want him because he simply couldn't provide that killer scoring threat - instead, he was an enabler. He was quick, had excellent vision, and created. This is what great guards do, and without that, Pullen is having a hard time transitioning into his new role.

We could also call this the CJ Effect, because it happened first and is much starker in every respect. CJ Lee's last year at Michigan, he wiggled into a starting role, earned a first-round upset, and almost beat out Blake Griffin's Sooners for a Sweet Sixteen birth. CJ didn't put up 20-point games. Didn't have to. He brought that leadership, vision, intangible blend that makes wins. Everyone in the Ford School agreed; the difference between 2008-09's Big 10 wins and 2009-10's let down was the lack of an enabler. And the Ford School knows - we almost won a game in intramurals (we're impartial AND know the game).

End of the day, K-State lost a lot more that 16 points/game when Clemente left. Even if you disregard what he did on the defensive end (which was a lot), his presence allowed Pullen to thrive. Now he's struggling. And that's got me a little nervous headed into conference play. Yes, we need our bigs to man up - but we need a creator even more.

The measure of a players greatness shouldn't be measured by his scorecard, but what his team accomplishes. Unless he's a runner. Then it's just what he accomplishes.


(Growing my Pullen Beard in 2009)

To Staying Ranked!

Having nothing better to do with my Saturday but lick my ER wounds, I sat down to watch the K-State/Texas game with the intent of attempting an actual report on it. A purely intrinsic pursuit, I thought it might be interesting to try a full write-up, encapsulating the holistic experience much the same way ESPN.com might cover a top-10 matchup with national intrigue.

What happened: I got bored after K-State went up 31-0. When that expanded to 39-0 in the 3rd, I zoned out; casually glancing back to revel in the beat down before becoming bored again and flipping to another channel. (That eight point expansion courtesy a 2-point conversion after Josh Cherry had his PAT blocked, picked it up off the bounce, and ran it in. Beautiful). Yet as embarrassed as Texas was, I'm still trying to grapple with how dominating the performance can be considered.

K-State only completed 2/4 passes for nine yards (2.3 yards/attempt) - yet this was a rushing attack Air Force and Georgia Tech have consistently used to annihilate opponents in the era of spread. As Taylor Martinez has shown, one needn't air it out to score points. UT did outgain K-State in yardage, 412-270. The game summary:

This makes it difficult to gauge the showing. Clean game on both sides, though a couple stupid UT mistakes allowed KSU to continue otherwise stalled drives. We were horrible on 3rd down. But five interceptions is AWESOME, especially against a heralded quarterback. Should we be disturbed that the defense caught 250% more passes than the offense? As of today (Thursday), Snyder still refuses to anoint a starting QB (an historically familiar bugaboo for purple fans). This means Mizzou has no idea what to expect. Carson Coffman had been displaying precision accuracy over his past two games while running for a couple touchdowns. Backup Collin Klein also runs - but with speed. He ran for 127 yards against UT. Mizzou must spend half the week's practice preparing for the option, half on nickel coverage. Which makes me not want to dwell on the past, so much as get really excited for the future.

Undefeated: Nothing to Show, Nothing to Lose

I find myself aimlessly wandering the streets at night, lost and confused in a brave new world I do not understand. My Wildcats remain undefeated entering the month of October, and are receiving votes in both AP and Coach's polls. Even more rare, my Chiefs are the sole undefeated team remaining in the NFL. (I've honestly forgotten what it's like to root for a team and have them emerge victorious.) Both have huge match-ups coming, each being in the unique situation of having little to lose but much to gain.

Kansas State doesn't have a lot to hang their hat on, with successes to-date being adequate. They beat a much different UCLA team than Texas lost to (literally, due to injuries), should've got beat at home against UCF, and took out Iowa State by a single score. Missouri State.

Kansas City finds itself in an equally questionable esteem. Squeakers against their first opponents, no victories over a winning team, and the undefeated stat is misleading b/c they're really only 3-0; receiving a bye this weekend didn't hurt their road to owning the league's only unblemished record.

This is the discourse surrounding each team, and is almost interchangeable (lame passing game, no real great defense personnel upgrades, wily yet unproven coaching staffs that may have outlived their luck…) Yet this weekend provides extraordinary opportunity for both to establish legitimacy. If Kansas State loses to Nebraska on Thursday, the entire nation will pause for five seconds before declaring 'we knew they were posers,' and flipping the channel. But if they win, a victory over UN would likely vault them into the top 20 (I'd say a ten point win lands them at #17). A loss wouldn't be met with surprise, but a win would be viewed credibly and carry staying power because of the accompanying 5-0 record.

Kansas City needn't worry about poll standings, but I'd still like to see them get a bit more respect on the national level. Problem is, they still haven't earned it. Beat the Colts on Sunday, and they'll get theirs. Not only will the West seem very winnable, but success is indicative of the ability to achieve success. Playoffs.

Both contests remain heady tasks, and the underdogs from Kansas won't be favored for a reason. Win, however, and something special is a possibility for both.