Let's NOT forget that keeping wildlife um...an amphibious rodent, for...um, you know domestic...within the city...that ain't legal either.

Every once in a great while, a message board will yield something remarkably similar to fruit, as long as you're counting good concepts and interesting questions as fruit. Otherwise, it's mostly dick jokes and fans with the distinct smell of dumbass on their breath (on both sides, I'm sure). But sometimes, there's a man, and I won't say hero because, what's a hero? But sometimes there's a man...

Whoa

Lost my train of thought.

Aw, hell, I done introduced it enough.

I was trolling around on an Ohio State message board when this came to my attention: a thread entitled "alarming fact that OSU is getting the screw." It was perfectly set up - and fit right in with the Buckeye disrespect mantra. Ohhhhh - of course! Ohio State has been getting screwed all these years! That's why they've only appeared in 3 National Titles games in the past 6 years, and have dominated the Big Ten, beaten Michigan to a bloody pulp, and have a recruiting class lined up that will make the '92 dream team look like FUCKING AMATEURS (football...basketball...whatever).

Then I actually read it.

The crux of the argument is this: For the past three seasons, Ohio State's opponents have been the least penalized on a yards/game basis than any team in the country. In 2007, Ohio State benefited from 37.2 yards per game from opposing team's penalties, 119th in the country. It's the same story from 2006, and 2005 - 29 and 35 yards/game respectively, both dead last in the NCAA. Them's the facts - inscrutable as ever. However, there must be another reason besides "OMG tOSU is getting SCREWED" right?

Right.

Theory: Big Ten Officials Don't Call Penalties

Conference ref's are all different. They're different in what they'll let teams get away with, what they'll call automatically, and the frequency with which they'll call it. Football is an odd sport in that there is probably a penalty on every play. The Big Ten's best player last year, Jake Long, admitted to "holding" as one of his favorite strategies, illuminating what has become the popular mantra amongst those playing the sport at a high level: it's a penalty if you get caught, an advantage otherwise.

The Big Ten seems particularly adept at playing by those rules - mostly because the ref's allow it. Of the 119 teams in NCAA, the vast majority of the Big Ten falls in the bottom 30 for penalties against - the notable outliers being Northwestern and Indiana who rank 51 and 21 respectively (important for later). Since the majority of games are played in conference using the same set of Big Ten officials, it stands to reason that Ohio State has the fewest penalty yards against at least partly because of the conference they play in. 4 of the 11 Big Ten teams fall in the bottom 10 of the rankings. To put it in perspective, the other teams in the bottom ten break down as follows: 2 MAC, 1 SEC, 1 Big 12, 1 Mountain West, 2 ACC. But this can't be the sole reason why Ohio State is ranked dead last over the past 3 years - if it were simply a conference bias, then there would be just as much chance that any other Big Ten team would be ranked at the bottom of the pile. There is something else going on here, and it's a bit...fishy.

Theory: Underdogs Get The Calls

In order to take on this theory, we need to establish something of a baseline understanding of how penalties work. The assumption is that teams do not consciously foul certain teams more than others. As I mentioned before, penalties occur on nearly every play - what matters is how/when they're called. For purposes of this discussion, I will assume that teams don't have specific agendas on penalties, and that they occur randomly throughout any game, regardless of opponent.

That being said, it is interesting to look at the rankings of each conference in terms of which teams gain the most yards on penalties. The top three in some of the major conferences with their final record in parenthesis:

ACC
2007
Duke (1-11)
Florida State (8-5)
Boston College (9-3)

2006
Duke (0-12)
Georgia Tech (9-5)
NC State (3-9)

2005
Clemson(8-4)
North Carolina (5-6)
Georgia Tech (7-6)

Big XII
2007
Kansas State (5-7)
Texas Tech (9-4)
Baylor (3-9)

2006
Baylor (4-8)
Texas (10-3)
Iowa State (4-8)

2005
Kansas (7-5)
Texas Tech (9-3)
Missouri (7-5)

Big Ten
2007
Indiana (7-6)
Northwestern (6-6)
Purdue (8-5)

2006
Indiana (5-7)
Northwestern (4-8)
Iowa (6-7)

2005
Wisconsin (10-3)
Penn State (11-1)
Northwestern (7-5)

There you have it - out of three conferences (only 3 because I don't have time to do the rest, and frankly, I see nothing that would suggest a different outcome) the teams that benefitted the most by officiating are by and large the underdogs of the conference. There are notable exceptions in the 2005 Big Ten season and Texas - the only teams on the list to crack 10 wins. Excepting those, this collection of teams is pretty "meh" and was probably an underdog in the majority of their conference games. Duke and Indiana led the ACC and Big Ten in opponent penalties for 2 years running with a combined record of 13-36. They were underdogs who got the calls.

The aggregate record of the teams above over a 3 year span is 172-161. If you throw out just 2 wins per team that came against the presumably lack-luster OOC games, you get 118-161. I could have made that 3 weak OOC games/team but given the subjectivity, I wanted to low-ball.

The upshot? The above teams, with some exception, sucked hard. And yet - somehow - they got all the calls. Meanwhile, teams like Ohio State (conference champs), Wake Forest (Division champs, conference champs), and Oklahoma (generally awesome) are somehow not getting the calls (they are all either at, or near the bottom of the ranks in every year profiled). It would stand to reason that a weaker team would need the benefit of penalties more than a stronger team would need to commit them, but no. Instead, we see teams that spend most of their time as underdogs getting the most yardage out of penalties.

I cannot, and will not speculate that refs are consciously pushing an underdog agenda, nor will I say Vegas is running things, Ref's are trying to control the spread, etc. For Big Ten fans, we need to remember the first theory - Big Ten refs generally don't call as many penalties as refs from other conferences, but we can also point to empirical evidence that suggests that the favored team in a matchup, for whatever reason, is most likely going to be penalized more than the underdog. So next time you're playing Iowa, Mr. Ohio State fan, and you start screaming "over the line" and bitching about the refs...and I hate to concede this...

you may be right.

An Introspective Look at Scheduling and Social Consciousness... or just scheduling

Here we sit, a mere 3 weeks and change away from the literal kickoff to the most glorious time of the year, fall practices have begun, teams are fine tuning (read: wholesale searching for answers), and more and more commentary regarding teams is percolating through websites, radio shows, and television. One thing that I’ve particularly enjoyed this offseason is the use of the term “sleeper” to describe several teams. A cursory Google search for “NCAA Sleepers” reveals Virginia, North Carolina, and yes, Utah as carrying that label. There are several aspects of describing a team as a “sleeper” that annoy most erudite college football fans, the foremost of which being that once a team is labeled as such, EVERYONE and their brother repeats it ad nauseum. This tends to negate the “sleepiness factor” that a team supposedly possesses - After all, when I hear the word “sleeper” I think of a team that could be surprisingly good.

This begs the philosophical question: “if everyone labels a team a sleeper, are they really a sleeper anymore?” Doesn’t being an “under the radar team” (another favorite by the way) mandate that you are better than your opponents think you will be? If everyone [and their brothers! – ed.] labels you as being potentially good, exactly how many opponents are going to overlook you? The way that the term has been utilized lately brings about a different connotation if you ask me.

Rather than simply saying that a team has a possibility of being “good” or “better” this year, many experts look at teams that lie outside of the major power conferences and dig deep into the murky colloquialism bag. What do they grab? Sleeper. Why? Well they wouldn’t want to damage their hard earned credibility by labeling a team as “good” and then end up being wrong would they? They’ve manipulated the game so that either way the team’s season turns out, they’re insulated from criticism. Who’s going to get upset at somebody for calling a team that flops a sleeper? It was just a hunch wasn’t it? People who make predictions that are more concrete stand to have their necks out on the line… see Kirk Herbstreit re: Anthony Morelli, or a certain Michigan Blogger printing National Title shirts prior to 2007. So now rather than going out on a limb and saying , “Hey I think team X has a shot at being solid this year!” analysts instead cushion themselves by using that other term (I’ve already typed it too many times).

You may be asking yourself, “What’s the point Champ?” Fair enough. Let’s take the team name “Utah” away, and instead simply look at the factors you’d normally examine to try to forecast a team’s season. You know, basics like difficulty of schedule, returning players, lost players, recent track record, coaching acumen, talent etc. If we do that for this Unknown team that resides in Unknownville and go ahead and crank this admittedly somewhat subjective data through the prediction machine, what do you come out with?

Returning Starters: 8 on offense (including all skill positions), 6 on defense

Momentum: Won 8 games in a row to close ’07 including bowl game against Navy

Coaching: Kyle Whittingham (ha…hahaha…. See, it’s dangerously close to Willingham… get it? Eh??) carries a 24-14 record in his three years since Urban Myer’s departure, and an impressive 3-0 mark in bowl games. Per the Utah media guide he is the first Utah coach EVER to take his team to a bowl game in each of his first three seasons. Not exactly chopped liver.

Schedule: There’s a reason many are saying that if Utah can get past Michigan they could run the table…

So what do we have here? A pretty decent outlook by most accounts no? So what would you call that? Me? I’d probably go with “a good football team with a good chance to be successful this coming season” but that’s just me. Hmmmm….

Here’s where things get interesting, and where I think the scheduling higher-ups at several schools could learn a key lesson or two. Utah (the somnolent one) has instant credibility available to it if it were to manage a win on August 30th. Michigan, despite many predictions of an abysmal season, stands to gain little from beating what, on paper at least, figures to be a pretty decent football team. Oh, and if they were to lose? Utah T-shirt sales would skyrocket in East Lansing and Columbus, because “hur-hur, yous lossst to thems!” Meanwhile, if Utah runs through its admittedly lackadaisical schedule with only a loss to the Maize and Blue, they will in all likelihood end up in a BCS bowl anyways. The decision to schedule Michigan is a win-win for the Utes.

Michigan, on the other hand, could stand to take a tactic from its arch rival in this regard. The Buckeyes have upped their OOC schedule in a very cunning way. Yes OSU plays USC this year, yes they’ve played Texas the past few years, and if you look ahead you’ll see a marquee matchup each season for the foreseeable future. What is hidden by these contests is a laughable remainder to the OOC schedule! OSU gets to play a big time game against a big time opponent (something most lay people would call a “high risk” game, but in fact is exactly the opposite), where a loss will NOT derail a season or a BCS hope (see: LSU vs. OSU last year), and where a win will scream “LEGITIMACY!” from the highest of peaks. All while having what amounts to exhibition games for the remainder of the OOC schedule. How is this not genius? How is it that Michigan locked themselves into playing Notre Dame for decades when they had an opportunity to say “Thanks for the rivalry, but maybe we should start seeing other people for a bit” a few years ago? Notre Dame has not added any panache to the Wolverines schedule over the past few years. I’m not discounting the tradition or the rivalry; it’s always a huge game to both schools. My point, however, is that Michigan simply doesn’t gain as much from playing ND as it did 15 years ago. Perfect example: after a blowout victory against the #2 ranked (!!!!) Fighting Irish in ’06, many were using that game as a “so-what” at the end of the year when “debate” raged over Florida or Michigan. What would have happened if Michigan had played, say, Oklahoma? Or Georgia? My guess is that UM would have gotten the nod for the rematch.

Instead, Michigan is now caught in the middle of a scheduling conundrum: with ND on the slate for God only knows how long, how do they put together a schedule that’s not too tough, not too cup-cakey, but juuuuuust right? Well you can’t; not by the national media standards anyway, and they matter, because well, they make the polls now don’t they? Despite the fact that Utah figures to be a solid football team, Michigan will not garner any votes or confidence from a victory against the Utes. A loss, however, will open up the opportunity to play every criticism card in the book. Oh, don’t get me wrong, I think a solid performance against Utah would be a huge confidence boost to not only the team and the coaching staff, but much of the fan base as well. The problem is that in this current system there’s more to it than that, and that ephemeral feeling that poll creators get when they see a big game win or loss as opposed to one against a mid major solid team is enough to make a huge difference these days.

So how does the sleeper thing fit into all of this? Pretty darn well if you ask me. The media at large has labeled Utah as a team that “could be good,” which conveniently means that if Michigan were to win on August 30th, the Utes probably weren’t as good as most thought, and perhaps Michigan might not be as bad as many said. What the sleeper “label” has done has put any actual evaluation on hold for Utah while reducing the likelihood of Michigan making any kind of impact on how it is viewed by those who vote in the polls.

While this might seem small in the grand scheme of things, I think it illuminates two things that Michigan has either looked at and passed on or failed to realize altogether: that scheduling a big time tough opponent early in the year is not as damaging as the prevailing notion makes it seem, and secondly, scheduling good teams that are not widely recognized as such poses the problem of large risk with little benefit.

Social Cognition and the College Football Fan

Social Cognition: The Basics

There is a concept out there on human behavior called Social Cognition, which is an offshoot of Cognitive Psychology. Essentially, it states that there are several programmed responses in our noggins to any and all external stimuli. We get these programmed responses, called schemas, by learning from and modeling those around us. Our various schemas are activated by external forces, and activated without our knowledge; they are programmed responses.

Essentially, there are two ways in which we subconsciously decide to activate a particular schema. They are salience and priming. Salience refers to the way in which the stimulus activating the schema stands out relative to other stimuli. For example, lets say you're at a tailgate at Ross-Ade with a bunch of your buddies. You're all wearing your Kyle Orton and Drew Brees jerseys, along with your Joe Tiller Custom Mustaches. Football is in the air. A lone man in an Indiana jersey joins your tailgate. Well, that just activated your "Indiana" schema, which also activated your "hostility" and "dislike" schemas. These schemas are grouped together because that's how you, a Purdue fan, have organized them. Obviously, an IU fan would have his "Indiana" schema clustered around different schemas such as "fun" "love" and "why the hell did I buy an IU football jersey." Your "Indiana" stimuli didn't just get activated out of the blue; it was activated because it just became very, very important to your immediate social surroundings. It became "salient."

Priming refers to the experiences immediately preceding the schema activation. Using the same example as above, that man in the IU jersey is presumably primed for a fight, being that he's at an away game, and the sort of guy to approach a hostile team's tailgate. Ever wonder why you can't fall asleep after watching an episode of Ghost Hunters? It's because the experience of Ghost Hunters has primed your "fear" schema. Completely ordinary noises and shadows are now interpreted as threats as a result.

So what does this have to do with football? Nothing. But it does shed some light on how we act and interact as fans. Each of us have our own schemas set up relating to our own preference in teams. My "Purdue" schema, and relative network of associated schemas, is wildly different from Joe Boilermaker's. Here's where things get interesting: Social Cognition is mostly concerned with the way new information is processed within preexisting schemas.

Why we feel the way we feel.

College Football fans are fun to study under these parameters, mostly because they make it so damn easy. Let's take the biggest bit of "new information" to come into the Big Ten this year: Rich Rodriguez. While most of us probably had a "Rich Rodriguez" (RR) schema set up, it was probably never salient or primed, so it was probably not used much. However, with RR taking over Michigan, we now have to assimilate that schema into a much more salient and much better primed "Michigan" schema. All of the sudden, RR is relevant in our Big Ten obsessed lives.

How you assimilate this new schema is largely dependent on how you've classified "Michigan." For an OSU fan, Rich automatically got thrown into the "bad" schema. For a UM fan, Rich got thrown into the "good" schema. This is, of course, simplified horrifically; in reality each individual's "RR" schema falls somewhere on a spectrum between good and bad.

As RR's schema becomes more primed and salient, people's minds will naturally pay more attention to new information regarding that schema. How we process that information, however, is largely dependent on how we've classified RR's schema. Confirmation Bias states that people will attend to the information that confirms their pre-existing schema, and ignore information that casts that schema into doubt. In action, confirmation bias looks like this, regarding the recent payout to WVU:

from an OSU message board:

"I laugh, Now you are forced to focus on the results of the season. I do believe you will be hoping to find distractions the next couple of years. This really provides another good opportunity to question the character and competence of DickRod. He drug the school and scUM football program through 7 months of this then ended up "settling" for the buy-out originally negotiated in his contract? I suppose he will claim victory in this. Hail to the Victors!"

Add in the requisite sarcastic smiley's, and you get the picture. Compare this with an unrelated response from a UM message board:

"7 months too long? Apparently you all aren't familair with the judicial system. It can take years for a case to go to trial. Honestly, it wouldn't have bothered me a bit if this thing took a couple of years. It truely don't think it would have been a distraction. Either way at the end of the day RR either was gonna pay it or get off. I think the longer this thing would have dragged on the more we would have learned about how corrupt WVU is and they would have looked worse in the court of public opinion more so than RR."

To an OSU fan, RR is a classless fool who not only got what was coming financially, but also sucks as a coach and will fail miserably. The new information was assimilated as such because of the pre-existing schema in which RR was categorized. RR = Bad, so only the "bad" new information was taken in. It also activated a whole other set of schemas related to RR, such as his moral character and coaching skills. Likewise, the Michigan fan's response came as a result of his own RR schema. RR = Good, thus, the new info was couched in a most positive way. Both sides took the new information, in this case the buyout ruling, and assimilated it according to their own confirmation bias.

There are two cliche's that have their roots in confirmation bias. They are "You'll hear what you want to hear" and "You'll believe what you want to believe." There are reasons cliche's exist; it is because they are true. If you already contemn a team, coach, or person, then any new information about that object will be parsed into positives and negatives, with the positives thrown out, and the negatives kept.

Why we act the way we act

There is another side of Social Cognition, and that is how activated schemas are either suppressed or enforced given the social situation. A pretty girl may activate a certain schema in your head, but for most of us, social constrictions and upbringing prevent us from grabbing said girl's ass. Mostly, it is because we know that if we do that, we will go to jail. Our social limitations on activated schemas are so ingrained that it is almost subconscious.

So what happens when we take away those social limitations? Message boards are a good place to start. Message boards are the home of anonymous insults; a place where there are very different social rules; and a place of little to no consequences for our actions. That's why you get trolls and e-thugs saying things they'd never say to your face at, say, a Purdue tail gait. It's why they are so full of vitriol. It's why blogs exist. It's the exact point that Buzz Bissinger was trying to make a few months ago. Activated schemas are not held accountable here on the interwebs, and it's up to blogs and message boarders to police themselves.

There's another way that social limitations are taken away that has nothing to do with anonymity. Alcohol. Wonder why it's easier to talk to girls when you're drunk (nevermind that you're still no good at it)? It's because your brain isn't limiting your activated schema to conform to anything, let alone social limitations. Wonder why something like this happens?



Normally, I'd wager that the social limitations of the situation (i.e. I'm not going to hurt another human being over collegiate allegiance) would prevent these fans from throwing with the intent to hurt. Add in alcohol and it all goes to shit. Their activated "hatred" schema has overpowered its limitations. Of course, extreme stupidity comes into play as well, as well as a host of other factors.

So, next time you're strolling along the internet message boards, talking with another fan, or simply assimilating some new bit of information about your favorite (or least favorite) team, keep in mind the process by which your brain is categorizing things. You may be surprised that by knowing the process, you learn more information. Idiots simply rely on existing schemas and add in information that agrees with them, and disregard information that doesn't. You are not an idiot. You are now informed.

Epic? Yeah, Probably.

Epic is so overused these days. It used to be that a dude - any dude - could just say "yeah, brah, it's gonna be epic" and he'd get a knowing nod. Now everything is epic. Witness:


That party last night*? Epic.



That slushi I just had? Epic.



That one time, 2 years ago, when we road tripped it to Panama City? Epic.



Space Mountain? Epic.


You see - when a word gets used in contexts for which it is not appropriate, it gradually loses its original meaning - and thus - loses its punch. Epic was first used as a word only describing the most over the top events. Now? My morning constitutional was epic. Allow me to educate:

Epic:
1. noting or pertaining to a long poetic composition, usually centered upon a hero, in which a series of great achievements or events is narrated in elevated style: Homer's Iliad is an epic poem.

2. resembling or suggesting such poetry: an epic novel on the founding of the country.

3. heroic; majestic; impressively great: the epic events of the war.

4. of unusually great size or extent: a crime wave of epic proportions.

Assuming we can throw out the first two definitions, we're left with "heroic; majestic; impressively great" or "of unusually great size or extent."

Well folks - in the truest definition of the word - the proportion of ill will, hatred, and bitterness resulting in the split of Rich Rodriguez from West Virginia has officially reached "epic."


HT: The Wiz

Full .pdf of the affidavit here
Rundown of Osama Bin Richrod here.

Ostensibly to make WVU look bad, Calvin MaGee (former assistant at WVU, current assistant at UM) claimed that Aschebrook - on behalf of the WVU athletic administration - told him that he would not be considered for the head coaching job because of his skin color.

"Specifically, Mr. MaGee has asserted that I [Aschebrook] told him that he would not be considered for the head coaching job at West Virginia University because of the color of his skin, and he also asserts that I stated 'this is West Virginia, they ain't [sic] up to the times yet, you know why...a lot of big boosters won't relate to you.' Finally, Mr. MaGee claims that I gestured to the top of his wrist as further evidence that his skin color was the reason for him not receiving consideration for the position of head football coach at WVU"

Who is Aschebrook? Well - he was an athletic fund raiser at WVU, before being painted a racist. He currently works in the same capacity (as far as I know - please correct me in the comments section if I'm wrong) for Arizona State. He is also categorically denying that any racist gesture or statement was made. From the affidavit:

"So there can be no misunderstanding, I NEVER made any racially discriminatory gesture, remark or engaged in any such conversation with Mr. MaGee during his entire time at West Virginia University"

What is left to determine is whether Aschebrook is a slimeball trying to weasel his way out of a stupid comment, or whether he's genuinely been slighted by MaGee and Rodriguez in an attempt to paint the WVU administration as racist, incompetent, and really mean. Remember, there is the small issue of a $4mil lawsuit to be settled.

I really do encourage you to read the entire affidavit, mostly because it's really interesting. I'm very surprised that whatever lawya went over this allowed it to be published as such - what with all the "that's fu-ud up" comments made by the accused.

Were these racial comments completely fabricated by Rich Rodriguez and his assistant Calvin MaGee in their secret laboratory under Fort Schembechler? Or is Aschebrook trying to save some face by turning this into yet another "he said, she said" argument that can never be settled?

Time will tell. I do know that Michigan just needs all of this to go away. I guarentee you E60 and "Outside the Lines" are having a battle right now on who gets to do the story here - and anytime your program ends up on either show, you've got problems.** Rodriguez and now MaGee are not petulant children refusing to take their medicine. In my estimation, they have a legitimate beef with the contract and buy-out at WVU - if they didn't the court wouldn't have upheld their right to contest it. However, the media is painting both to be that petulant child refusing to play by the rules, taking their ball, and going home. Michigan won't stand for that. Not a down of football has been played, and already Michigan is getting more negative press than (probably) they did during the entirety of Lloyd Carr's career. Bill Martin is sweating. Mary Sue Coleman can't be happy. Michigan needs this to go away, and they need it to go away now. Epic should be applied to wins, seasons, and championships. It shouldn't be applied to problems. Right or wrong, Rodriguez - for the good of the university for which he now works - should pay up and make this go away as quickly and quietly as possible.

*Picture taken from the "world space party" which is pure unabridged awesome.

**Unless the story has to do with giving championship rings to dying kids, or something of that nature. If a kid ain't dying, then it can't be good (too harsh?).

VLSPSBET

Beauford and I haven’t teased this out yet, so consider the following a trial run… and I PROMISE this is the last time I mention Billy Packer for months… anyways, Monday when Packer continually failed to recognize that the Kansas Jayhawks were utilizing a zone defense in the second half, it got me thinking about many of the misnomers or misconceptions that are continually reinforced by your average sports announcer… and as a result by your common sports fan.

Well gentlemen and madams, when has average ever been acceptable? You’re not that type of sports fan; you’re not that type that lets somebody in your group talk about yesterday’s game, totally BLOW the description and let it slide… no, Beauford and Champ know you better than that. You expect to converse on a higher level when you enter into an intellectual debate within the sports genre; and you expect those conversing with you to have a base of understanding so that you may effectively communicate with them. It’s an unwritten rule that’s simply understood.

So without further ado, we present to you a possibly ongoing series here at State of Game:

The Verne Lundquist School of Proper Sports Broadcasting Etiquette and Technique

Or VLSPSBET if you’re into that whole brevity thing.

Why Verne Lundquist you ask? Because there is no finer sir, and I’m offended that you asked in the first place. SEC folk (shudder) have been privy to his talents for years. Verne is still whipping young pups in this broadcasting game with his smooth delivery, clutch performances, and salient understanding of several sports. All of that while a myriad of analysts out there can’t seem to get a grasp on just one. Think about this, in the Masters alone, Lundquist has been immortalized TWICE:

1986: Nicklaus sinks his birdie putt on the 17^th part of the greatest 9 holes of golf ever played at Augusta, and that moment will inexorably be tied with Lundquists epitome of perfection: “YES SIR!!!!!!!”

2005: Woods holes the up and back chip for birdie on the 16^th proving that golf balls do in fact have a flair for the dramatic. Again, this will never be separated from Verne’s sublime: “In your LIFE have you ever seen anything like that?!”

So there’s your reasoning right there… In these sections, we will deal with all sorts of errata of the announcing type, and likely harbor some very ill will toward several individuals in particular. Who you ask? Well you’ll just have to keep checking back to see won’t you!!! Onward.

Today’s topic for VLSPSBET: The old trusty reverse, what it is, and what it is NOT!

Few plays in football are so poorly understood and so often mistaken by announcers. The reverse is not a new play, it has been around for a quite a while… and yet, it appears that somewhere in the textbook of football commentating, the “END AROUND” was mistakenly switched with the definition of “REVERSE”… naturally, then when a team runs a true reverse, the fools in the booth fall all over themselves to add to its grandiosity, labeling the play “a DOUBLE reverse”!!!! Don’t be that guy dear readers, don’t be that idiot who stands up and screams reverse during a football game when the play is merely an end around, you’d disappoint Verne.

So how do you avoid this most basic of mistakes? How about actually recognizing what each play entails? Without futher ado:

An END AROUND: Is a play where the quarterback hands off to a wide receiver in the backfield. The receiver motions into the backfield as the ball is snapped and receives said handoff from the quarterback, he then proceeds (if all has gone well and according to plan) towards the opposite end of the line from where he lined up, hoping to, as they say, “catch the corner”. If we had a dollar for every time this simple play (and dare we say, when properly used, effective) was exasperatedly called a reverse, we would be enjoying many fine things.

A REVERSE: A reverse is usually built off of your basic sweep play, in which the quarterback takes the snap and pitches the ball to the tailback, who for the purposes of this discussion proceeds to run towards the eastern sideline. Meanwhile, the receiver who started out on the east side of the formation begins to motion in the opposite direction… that would be westward. The tailback then proceeds to hand-off or pitch the ball to the receiver, who is now headed towards the western sideline and hopefully in the opposite direction of all 11 players on the defensive side of the ball. Note the key here is that the ball REVERSES DIRECTION… Not exactly a difficult concept to grasp now is it? What about the ever so rare double reverse? Well gentle reader, simply add yet another exchange on the end of your usual reverse with the ball now in the hands of the third ball carrier on the play (HB – WR – WR) and headed back in the original direction that the play began in, for us, east.

So there you have it, a brief and succinct breakdown of the difference between the end around and the reverse… keep track and savor the moment the first time this season that someone fails to recognized the simple difference between the two!

Spreadin' Like Butter Part III: Rich Rodriguez

In what was probably the most interesting off-season story of 2007-08, Rich Rodriguez pulled a Jim Irsay, and left the West Virginia faithful high and dry. Under cover of night, he shredded his way out of Morganstown, and landed in Ann Arbor. While the seat in Ann Arbor may not be more comfortable, it is considerably higher up. If his Morganstown job was in coach, it was definitely an exit row. But he got offered a first class ticket.

Done with the metaphors? So are we.

The move garnered hatred from nearly everybody involved. Not funny hatred, mind you, but the kind of hatred where you're uncomfortable if you're lucky enough to not be directly involved. Of course, this isn't what this post is about, and it's been beaten to death by everybody capable of typing. The upshot of the situation is this: Rich Rodriguez wears the M hat now - and his spread offense is coming with him.

What of this much-ballyhooed switch? Can Michigan pull if off without a mobile quarterback (or indeed, any quarterback)? Let's take a look at what Rich does with his spread in a perfect world (also known as the 2007 Mountaineers). FYI - I will be referring to Rich's spread as the "zone read," despite the fact that it can be called nearly anything you want it to be...

First, it's important to understand the base set that the zone read employs, because it is different than the run and shoot. The run and shoot employs 4 wide receivers, and is pass to set up the run. Rich's zone read is run first, run fast, and run always. I beg you to forgive the absolutely shoddy work on this, but I think you'll get the point:


Perhaps the most important thing to notice is the use of the shotgun. While Mouse started using the shot gun when he adapted his spread to modernity, it was not a staple of original spread offenses. There is still no true tight end, although for various blocking schemes one can be incorporated by taking out a slot receiver, or the full back.

The quarterback, upon taking the snap, will proceed to "read" the defensive end. He does this by seeing whether the end is shooting down the line of scrimmage in anticipation of an inside run, or shooting upfield in a pass rush. At the same time, the tailback gets ready for a hand off that may or may not be coming. If the defensive end shoots down the LOS, the quarterback tucks the ball, and runs around the end. If the defensive end shoots upfield, the quarterback gives the ball to his tailback to run between the tackles. This all happens in about a half second, and looks something like this (again, forgive the artwork):

If the end shoots down the line of scrimmage (yellow = ball carrier):


The halfback takes what has become a "play action" and sells it as long as he can, while the QB darts around the end of the line.

If the end shoots upfield, it looks like this:


The halfback takes the handoff, and runs as far as his legs can carry him.

Why does this work? It takes the defensive end out of the play without effectively blocking him. In a game that is defined (according to Lombardi) on blocking and tackling, if you can schematically remove a player (in this case, the defensive end) from the equation without utilizing one of your blockers on him, you're one up on the defense.

This is as basic as the zone read gets, and looks almost nothing like the run and shoot. This is because...well...it isn't the run and shoot. But it still employs some of the basic concepts of the original spread. First, it relies on options to get the ball into space. In the run and shoot, the QB and receiver must be on the same page because routes are run according to what the coverage is doing. In the zone read, running lanes are established based on a read of coverage. Also, both employ no-huddle strategy, and spread the field tactics. You simply won't find the power-I in the zone read.

What Rich does better than anyone (IMO) is make adjustments, and take things one step further. For example, what if you could eliminate two players on the defensive side schematically? Thats what I call the "triple-option read." It starts the same, the QB reads the defensive end. In this case, if he gets a "hand off" read, he hands it to his tailback the same as always. If he gets a "tuck it" read, he takes off, with the fullback pursuing. Here's where it gets fun. He's almost immediately in the 2nd level because the d-end on that side has taken himself out of the play. Once into that second level, he has another option: keep, or pitch to his fullback.

Depending on where that backer or corner is going, he can "remove" that player from the defense. If the tackler takes the QB, he can pitch it. If the tackler takes the pitch man, the QB keeps it, and it well on his way to scoring. Schools who are "out-talented" use this offense to great success because it neutralizes one of the beasts on defense you're trying to beat. It totally takes him out of the equation. With the right maneuvering, it can take 2 of those beasts out - significantly improving your odds of moving the football.

I'll let Rich explain. This video is worth its weight in gold (It doesn't weigh anything, but picture a VHS tape with a brick glued to it. Good for playback? no. Good for "weight in gold?" yes):



The offense works. Witness Appalachian State, Illinois, Oregon, West Virginia. It hasn't won a National Title game yet, but that's not for lack of effectiveness. The breaks haven't fallen its way yet, but it's only a matter of time before this type of offense runs the table. Why hasn't it yet?

For one thing, your quarterback is incredibly exposed. You'd better get a guy who can take hit after hit in this offense to play quarterback, because sliding isn't an option. Tim Tebow, who is 9 feet tall, bench presses Chevy Malibu's (I've seen it), and is fast as hell was hurt this year. Why? Excessive pounding, and we mean that in only the most non-sexual way. Pat White's dislocated thumb was probably the main reason why the worst team coached by the best mustache (Pitt and Wannstedt respectively) was able to beat WVU. Dennis Dixon ended his Heisman candidacy by blowing out his knee.

As you can see, the quarterback position can't be played by just anyone - it takes a kid who can make split-second decisions with accuracy. If you've found a kid who can do that, you'd better hope to God that he stays healthy, because chances are you don't have two.

Which brings us to Michigan, and what I think will be the most intriguing storyline of long-term college football for years to come. Until now, the zone read has been in place at traditionally marginal institutions (read: schools who couldn't compete without this system). Now it's come to one of the big boys who perennially gets pretty much whoever they want. At West Virginia, Rich got lucky with Pat White, who was a middling 3 star CORNERBACK. When Pat went down, Rich didn't have anyone to turn to because West Virginia isn't exactly a destination for top-flight fast as hell athletes.

Well, Michigan is a destination for those athletes. Not only that, but it's a destination for offensive linemen who eat bad ass for breakfast, receivers who block effectively, and running backs who leap over tacklers. In short, the talent at Michigan is there to run whatever system they want. Will the system that equalizes the field in a mismatch provide the same boost to a team who is already talented? We'll need to see it in action before we know, but the next 5 years or so will be very interesting for Michigan.

Of immediate concern, however, is what the hell Rich is going to do without a fast quarterback. His zone read absolutely requires speed at that position, and um, yeah...Rich don't got it. Threet's not going to be tucking and running. Find out what I think Rich is going to do when we take a deep look at Florida's Leak/Tebow combo in Part IV.

I leave you with this, the gayest highlight film I've ever seen. It's supposedly a film of Glenville State College: The Rich Rodriguez Years, but it's more male posturing than football. I don't understand it, and will pay $5 to the commenter who explains...



Coming Soon: Part IV - the Leak/Tebow Spread

Spreadin' Like Butter: Part One

There has been much discussion throughout the fanbase of the Big Ten about what a "spread offense" is, and maybe more importantly, isn't. What can be assumed, at this point, is that a spread offense means pretty much whatever the hell you want it to mean, depending on your variables.

Michigan Fan: We didn't land Pryor...so...Rich's spread doesn't need a mobile QB!

Ohio State Fan: We didn't run a spread! Troy Smith was a pocket passer who ran as a last resort. We live by 3 yards and a cloud. We live in 1968. We don't lose to spread offenses, our defense just happens to be inept at covering them...

Purdue Fan: We've been spread fucking eagle since Tiller's Mustache rode into town. Don't try to tell us what a spread means.

Northwestern Fan: We use the spread to be competitive in football because it seems to nuetralize the opponent's superior talent. BTW, check out my SAT score if you want superior. Boo-Yah.

Indiana Fan: Huh?

So you can see that the spread means various things to various people. Ohio State doesn't lose to the spread offense, they just don't perform well against it. And heaven forbid you suggest that they ran a version of it in during the Troy Smith years. The spread is now a Michigan thing. And all Michigan things are evil.

So we here at State of Game have taken a hint from SMQ's football explainer series, and we've decided to do one of our own. We'll break down the spread from start to finish and beyond, hopefully with some helpful illustrations. So sit back, relax, and enjoy Spreadin' Like Butter Part One - History.

Part I

Like so many things shiny and new, the spread offense can trace its beginnings back to humility: one man coaching at a high school in Middle of Nowhere, OH. In tiny Middletown, presumably named for being equidistant from Cincinnati and Dayton, a man by the name of Glenn "Tiger" Ellison coached football. The year was 1945. In much the same way that basketball was revered in the state to the west, football was king in Ohio during a time that desperately needed distraction. Tiger Ellison, apart from being an English literature teacher, motivation speaker, and author, was an innovator in a game that had grown stagnant. While other teams were cobbling together as much mass as they could muster for offensive lines that would block strait ahead, Tiger's formations were often considered sparse - almost as if there weren't enough people on the line of scrimmage. His offense was the run and shoot - and the first spread.

Tiger's run and shoot would employ 4 receiver sets, and the ability to adjust to whatever the defense was doing. It would not have any tight ends on the line, and it routinely featured one running back that would often motion out wide. If you would be so kind as to forgive the defensive scheme, it typically was aligned like this:

In Tiger's run and shoot, the two slot backs were typically bigger players who were capable of running as well as catching the ball. This provided an inside threat that kept defenses from ignoring the middle. Typically, these bigger receivers would be the ones motioning, as well as the ones who would catch the 4 and 5 yard passes under the defense's zone. Basically, they provided the running game by running short routes that were easily completed. The extra beef was needed because often times these players would take punishing hits while trying to cut up field. In the NFL, these slot backs were typically smaller to maximize speed. They were usually allowed to catch the ball, then punished severely by charging safeties and linebackers.

Also of note is the lack of the true tight end. The 5 man line went tackle to tackle, which is why most defensive schemes relied heavily on the blitz when trying to defend the run and shoot.

Pre-snap, a slot back would typically motion to a spot that garnered the most favorable match up. This would also usually reveal the type coverage the defense was in. If a man followed the motion, they were in man - strait up Madden style. Once the ball was snapped, the receivers each had the option of what route to run, all dependent on what the defense was doing. If a safety was blitzing on one side, the receiver may run a fly route. If he was sitting in deep coverage, it may be broken off to the sideline, etc. The trick was that the quarterback would have to make the exact same read, and often throw to a spot before the receiver even got there. This, of course, led to many "tacopants" throws, as well as INT's. Pressure could often force the quarterback to make a bad decision, and was the main defense against the run and shoot.

Once the threat of the pass was established, often times you would see runs off tackle, or between the tackles. This was accomplished by spreading the defense thin on the assumption that further plays would be passes. The run and shoot truly "pass to set up the run." Once both were established, the defense was nearly powerless to stop an offense that constantly adapted - in play - to what they were doing.

Tiger ran the Run and Shoot to perfection, compiling a 124-46-9 record while at Middletown High. For those playing along at home, that's winning at a 70% clip over a 17 year career. In 1963, he joined the coaching staff of Woody Hayes at Ohio State, finally retiring in 1968 after Ohio State won the National Championship. In his retirement, he wrote a book called Run-And-Shoot Football: The Now Attack. Clocking in at 510 pages, the tome is the virtual bible of the offense. It can be yours for just over $500.00 from Amazon.

It was from this basic philosophy that the modern day spread was born. One man on a field in Ohio drastically changed the landscape of football as we know it today. As time passed, other coaches tweaked the system to fit their personnel, and to further confuse the defenses they faced. However, the guts of the spread still lie in the run and shoot as invented by Tiger Ellison, whose portriat hangs in the High School Lobby with other Middletown legends, Stan Lewis, Paul Walker, Ed "Skeeter" Payne and Elmo Lingrel. It is of Tiger standing under the fading twilight of an autumn day - football in hand, quarterback at his side. I don't imagine that Tiger knew he was pioneering in those days. My guess is that he had figured out a way to win football games, and that was good enough for him.

Coming Soon: Spreadin' Like Butter Part Two: Early Tweaks.