Alan Krueger, Meet the Iron Law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_B._Krueger

Dear Mr. Alan B. Krueger,

As you step into your new post as Chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, I offer you my hearty congratulations. I think it is a little strange that you appear to be the most insanely handsome economist ever, but that doesn’t disqualify you in my book. Even if it did, I would be reassured by the more normal bug-eyed economist image on your Wikipedia page; I assume that the truth of your appearance is somewhere in between.

That is not why I am writing, however. I am writing to tell you a story. Once upon a time there was a young Chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisors. He was a good economist–he could draw supply and demand charts all day long, he could smoothly explain current account deficits or how Pissarides was totally carried by Diamond and Mortenson in their Nobel-prize winning analysis of markets with search frictions because his whole model of price creation in markets with high friction was a ripoff of Harsanyi’s work on equilibria in non-competitive games. So, here he is, a personable guy. Handsome guy, too–not Alan B. Krueger handsome, but handsome. You know where he used to sit? Your chair. Yep, I’m talking about Austan Goolsbee, who even as we speak is buying snowshovels and woolen scarves and a survival knife with a compass in the handle and preparing to eke out some last, bitter years at the University of Chicago.

Unless you want to share his fate, you need to fix the economy. And it’s fuckin easy. Check it out. Behold the annual returns on a $10 trillion investment in 2007, rolled over year after year:
2007: +59%, $15.9 trillion
2008: +19%, $18.92 trillion
2009: +16%, $21.95 trillion
2010: +11%, $24.36 trillion

Yep, that’s a 144% ROI over four years. If Austan had taken my advice last year he’s have had $1.1 trillion extra dollars to plug in someplace, and would still be living in a penthouse overlooking the Potomac instead of hunkered down under a snowdrift. Here’s how you do it: Set aside $10 trillion; put $1 trillion down on any Pac 12 team led by a senior quarterback. That’s it. If you lose, you pay $1.1 trillion. If you win, you get $1 trillion.

Here are your guys this year:
Nick Foles, Arizona.
Tyler Hansen, Colorado.
Andrew Luck, Stanford.

I have half a mind not to include “Tyler Hansen” because I don’t know who he is, but it appears he’s started a dozen or so games in 2009 and 2010, so fine. Anyway, sometime in January, you’ll be walking into the Oval Office with heftybags full of million dollar bills.

Sincerely,

Adam

Starting with $10 trillion
Week 1:
Stanford covers against San Jose State: W
Arizona covers against N. Arizona: W
Colorado doesn’t cover against Hawaii: L
Rolling total: $10.9 trillion.
Week 2:
Stanford covers against Duke: W
Arizona doesn’t cover against Okla St: L
Colorado covers against Cal: W
Rolling total: $11.8 trillion
Week 3:
Stanford (Luck) vs Arizona (Foles): No wager
Colorado covers against Colo St: W
Rolling total: $12.8 trillion
Week 4:
Stanford bye.
Colorado doesn’t cover 16.5 against tOSU: L
Arizona doesn’t cover 14 against UO: L
Rolling total: $10.6 trillion
Week 5:
Stanford covers against UCLA: W
Colorado doesn’t cover -3 against WSU: L
Arizona covers 12.5 against USC: W
Rolling total: $11.5 trillion
Week 6:
Stanford against Colorado: (no bet)
Arizona doesn’t cover against OSU: L
Rolling total: $10.4 trillion
Week 7:
Stanford covers against WSU: W
Colorado doesn’t cover 17 against UW: L
Arizona bye.
Rolling total: $10.3 trillion
Week 8:
Stanford covers against UW: W
Colorado doesn’t cover 30.5 against UO: L
Arizona covers against UCLA: W
Rolling total: $11.2 trillion
Week 9:
Stanford covers against USC: W
Colorado doesn’t cover 32 against ASU: L
Arizona doesn’t cover against UW: L
Rolling total: $10 trillion
Week 10:
Stanford covers against OSU: W
Colorado doesn’t cover 20 against USC: L
Arizona doesn’t cover against Utah: L
Rolling total: $8.8 trillion
Week 11:
Stanford fails to cover against UO.
Colorado against Arizona: No bet.
Rolling total: $7.7 trillion
Week 12:
Stanford vs Cal: L -17
Colorado vs UCLA: L +11
Arizona vs ASU: W +10
Rolling total: $6.5 trillion
Week 13:
Stanford vs ND: W -7
Colorado vs Utah: W +22.5
Arizona vs ULLAF: L -13.5
Rolling total: $7.4 trillion
Bowls
Stanford vs OKST: W +4.5
Rolling total: $8.4 trillion

How to Cure the Federal Budget

Dear Austan Goolsbee,

Congratulations on your pending appointment as chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisors! I realize that these are difficult economic times, and you have your work cut out for you, and I wanted to offer my insight to help you get the American economy rolling again.

Federal receipts are about $2.5 trillion, and our spending stands at about $3.5 trillion. Our national debt is above $12 trillion and growing. These are grave problems, for sure. But I’ve got good news: I’ve found a way out of this predicament. Work those phones, borrow ten trillion, and lay it on Pac 10 senior quarterbacks in Las Vegas.

Crazy? Hardly. Had those stodgy, stick-in-the-mud banking nerds that preceded you done this in the last three years, the US economy would be the envy of the world. Behold the annual returns for a $10 trillion investment in 2007, rolled over year after year:
2007: +59%, $15.9 trillion
2008: +19%, $18.92 trillion
2009: +16%, $21.95 trillion
…that’s a return of more than 100%, padding our federal budget with $12 trillion in fresh, sweet dollars, reversing our deficits and eliminating our debt. Yeah, you have to pay some financing costs for the original loan, but, hey, I don’t need to tell the White House Council of Economic Advisors that! (Remember–you probably won’t even dip halfway into that $10 trillion to get started, and we’d only need to carry a loan for a few months.)

How does this work, exactly? It’s not hard: All you do is bet a trillion every time a senior Pac 10 quarterback plays. You might lose one or two weeks, but by the time the bowl games are over we’re going to be rolling in guns and butter. So here you go–just keep betting on every game played by University of Washington and UC Berkeley, so long as their veteran senior quarterbacks Jake Locker and Kevin Riley stay upright.

Enjoy your new job, and thanks for your time.

Sincerely–

Adam

Ground Rules: $10 trillion available, betting $1.1 trillion each game (that’s $1 trillion and a $100 billion ‘vig’)
Week 1: UW vs BYU, BYU by 3: BYU wins by 6. LOSS.
Rolling total: $8.9 trillion
Week 1: Cal vs UCD, Cal by 37: Cal wins by 49. WIN.
Rolling total: $9.9 trillion
Week 2: UW vs Syr, UW by 12: UW wins by 21. WIN.
Rolling total: $10.9 trillion
Week 2: Cal vs Colo, Cal by 10.5: Cal wins by 45. WIN.
Rolling total: $11.9 trillion
Week 3: UW vs Neb, Neb by 3: Nebraska wins by about 50. LOSS.
Rolling total: $10.8 trillion
Week 3: Cal vs Nev, Cal by 2.5: Nevada wins by about 50. LOSS.
Rolling total: $9.7 trillion
Week 4: UW bye.
Week 4: Cal vs. Arizona, Arizona by 6.5. Cal covers, losing by 1. WIN
Rolling total: $10.7 trillion.
Week 5: UW vs USC, USC by 10; UW wins by 1. WIN.
Rolling total: $11.7 trillion
Week 5: Cal bye.
Week 6: UW vs ASU, UW by 2.5. UW loses by 10. LOSE.
Rolling total: $10.6 trillion
Week 6: Cal vs UCLA, Cal by 7.5. Cal wins by 28. WIN.
Rolling total: $11.6 trillion
Week 7: UW vs OSU, UW by 1.5. UW wins by 1. LOSE.
Rolling total: $10.5 trillion
Week 7: Cal vs USC, USC by 2. Cal loses by 40 or so. LOSE.
Rolling total: $9.4 trillion
Week 8: UW vs Arizona, Arizona by 6. Arizona wins by 30. LOSE.
Rolling total: $8.3 trillion
Week 8: Cal vs ASU, Cal by 3. Cal wins by 33. WIN.
Rolling total: $9.3 trillion
Week 9: UW vs Stanford, Stanford by 7. Stanford wins by 41. LOSE.
Rolling total: $8.2 trillion
Week 9: Cal vs OSU, OSU by 2. OSU wins by 28. LOSE.
(RILEY knocked out for the season)
Rolling total: $7.1 trillion
Week 10: NO SR QBs start (Locker out vs Oregon)
Week 11: UW vs UCLA, UW by 2.5. TBD.
UW covers against UCLA
Week 12: UW vs Cal, TBD.
UW covers against Cal.
Week 13: UW vs WSU, TBD.
UW covers against WSU
Bowl Game: UW vs Nebraska
UW covers against Nebraska

Final total: $11.1 trillion!!

Nick Aliotti’s Name Has One “L” and Two “T”s

Josh, here’s a topic ripe for discussion. I grew up in the stands at Autzen with my father shaking his head in dismay at other spectators loudly bemoaning Rich Brooks’ playcalling. Football coaching, like presidenting and a lot of other stuff, is pretty easy to criticize, since every other play or so your team will be stopped for virtually no gain, and every tenth play or so something genuinely bad (sack, fumble, penalty) will happen. (This excludes the Auspicious Event of November 29, 2008).

Now, in retrospect, Rich Brooks’ playcalling was probably not off the charts in its greatness, but, first, he was generally in “run the ball and shorten the game and hope like hell their better, stronger, faster players have an off day” mode. Second, he was the professional football coach of the team: he knew his players, he lived and breathed football strategy, his career depended on success (or, in those days, a semblance of success). Who the hell am I, or is the drunk guy in section 22, to think I honestly have a better idea about what to do than Brooks?

(Tangent: did you see the article about Rich Brooks’ vomiting problem? Who knew that gruff old buzzard had it in him!)

To this day, I’m loathe to criticize my teams’ football coaches. I check out Rob Moseley’s blog sometimes, and I’m jarred by the criticism that some folks level at Mike Bellotti and Nick Aliotti. I’m of two minds about this, I guess: on the one hand, criticism is healthy and American, and I’m sure the coaches can take it. On the other hand, what the hell do these people know that the coaches don’t?

I’m going to assume you hold Mike Bellotti in the same high regard I do. His willingness, having seen firsthand what Urban Meyer’s Utah offense could do, to scrap his own signature offense, that’s an old dog learning a new trick. I’m grateful to the guy, and proud of what he’s helped build.

Then there’s Aliotti. That old buzzard just keeps sticking around. As discussed in an earlier post, his defenses do pretty well when you take into account the sheer volume of defense they have to play (40 minutes or so per game, versus 30 for other teams), but he’s not greatly loved. I defer to his understanding of defensive schemes, since I can’t tell the difference between a cover two and a punt return, and his experience, and his success in moving guys to the NFL, but am I wild about him? Not especially.

The Iron Law. Of Iron.

As discussed (and profited from in recent years) I am a big proponent of the Iron Law of Pac 10 Football, that you can’t win the Pac 10 title without a senior (or insanely veteran-seeming) quarterback. There have been exceptions to this lately (Jeremiah Masoli and Sanchez, for instance), but it’s still a good place to start, and a good, basic rule of thumb.

2010 ushers in The Second Iron Law, one that is every bit as obvious and never, ever mentioned outside of the four walls of my house: every team plays nine games against fellow Pac 10 teams in the Pac 10 round robin, so some teams play five Pac 10 home games, some teams play four. I will commit a research day to proving this proposition, but it strikes me that this constitutes a Second Iron Law: five Pac 10 home games are a key ingredient for success.

Two Iron Laws. For flavor, I have stirred in returning starters (good), players lost to the NFL (bad), and assembled an uncanny preview of the 2010 Pac 10 football season. Only one team has both of those Iron Laws working for it. I guess it makes picking number one easy; the rest is hard.

1. Cal has Kevin Riley returning as a senior starter, and has an awesome schedule. This is a program oh-so-close to putting it all together, and if 2010 isn’t their year I can’t imagine when it’s going to be. I see Cal having a good edge in their schedule–four Pac 10 away games (including one at USC), but getting Oregon, UW, Stanford at
home, and they don’t leave Berkeley after November 6. 15 returning starters, lost three players to the draft. And, yes, this is the team that got rolled like 38-0 at Husky Stadium last November, and picking them makes me uncomfortable. But I must.

2. OSU is always good, and looks good again this year, but they’re going to have a new quarterback. They have a great schedule, though–four Pac 10 away games (including Washington), but getting USC, Oregon, and Cal at home (Cal off a bye). These fucking morons scheduled Louisville, TCU, and Boise State in their nonconference schedule–they always start slow anyway, but this team could go 0-3 out of conference and then piss everybody off by winning the Pac 10. 16 returning starters, lost one player to the draft.

3. Oregon had nearly everybody returning, including an off-the-charts senior quarterback, and I’d have felt pretty good about our chances, but, of course, Masoli’s out for the season. That’s a big chink in the armor. Oregon even has a terrific defense, which is a strange thing to have in the Pac 10, and I (and most oddsmakers) still put us sort of reluctantly atop the Pac 10 preseason lists, but that’s a hell of a lot to put on the shoulders of two guys named “Nate Costa” and “Darron Thomas.” I take some comfort in the fact that Costa is a senior, and has gotten his feet wet with Kelly’s system, but I have to admit that Oregon’s downside without a veteran QB is high. Crap schedule: Oregon has five Pac 10 away games, including USC and Cal. 18 returning starters, lost three players to the draft.

4. USC has a sophomore quarterback and, as you say, a lot of talent around him, but that program has had so much coaching upheaval in the last two years (and potential sanctions later this week) that I’m hoping they’re still a mess. This is probably wishful thinking. Five Pac 10 away games for the Trojans, including their dreaded visit to the Reser Stadium (they have not won in the Willamette Valley in four years and counting). 14 returning starters, lost seven players to the draft.

5. Washington, mostly because of five Pac 10 away games that include Oregon, USC, and Cal. Look, the First Iron Law dictates that I have to put money on every game senior Jake Locker plays this year, and I like doing so, and–better still–Washington has 17 returning starters and coaching stability, but this remains a team one year removed from 0-12. They’ll cover spreads, they’ll get to a bowl, but it’s hard to move them higher than fifth. 17 returning starters, lost two players to the draft.

6. I lump Arizona, Stanford, and Washington together in my head–all teams that lost key people and have suspect defenses, but return terrific quarterbacks (only Locker is a senior, of course). Any one of those three has a legitimate shot, as well as huge question marks. Pencil in Stanford behind Andrew Luck; this is the team that beat the snot out of USC in LA last year. Alas, Ferd has five Pac 10 away games, including Oregon, Washington, and Cal. Good luck with that. 15 returning starters, lost three players to the draft.

7. UCLA will be solid again, great on defense and trying like hell to keep their sophomore quarterback Prince upright for a change. That team is snakebit at quarterback. Only four Pac 10 away games, but they include Washington, Oregon, and Cal. 14 returning starters, lost three players to the draft.

8. Arizona has Nick Foles coming back and a great schedule with only four Pac 10 away games (including Oregon) with Cal, USC, and Washington in Tempe. Or Tucson. Whichever. Problem being, they have just 9 returning starters. Lost two guys to the draft.

9. WSU (18 returning starters) can’t keep losing forever. Tons of experience–just none of it good. Just four Pac 10 away games, none of them impossible (UCLA, Stanford, ASU, OSU). They’d better take advantage of this. Nobody got drafted.

10. Imagine what you don’t want–ASU has it. A new quarterback, just nine returning starters, and five Pac 10 road games that include Washington, Cal, USC, and OSU. If these guys can’t finish behind WSU, nobody ever will. They lost four players to the draft.

Round 3: Pac 10 Senior Quarterback Cash Bonanza

The thesis: A seasoned Pac 10 senior quarterback gives his team a huge advantage; put your money on his side of the spread and become rich. It works: see 2007 and 2008. Spoiler Alert: 16% Return on Investment in 2009!

Alas: 2009 is not a year for seasoned Pac 10 senior quarterbacks. OSU has a corner on the market in Moevao and Canfield. The only other senior starter entering the season is ASU’s Danny “Who’s Danny Sullivan” Sullivan; I don’t know if I can define “seasoned,” but Danny Sullivan fails to pass the “Danny Sulllivan” standard for quarterback seasoning.

This means that in 2009 I am an advocate of betting money on the OSU Beavers. Eegs. In fact, as the season begins, I have no other team to bet on.

Four senior quarterbacks are backups entering the season, notably Stanford’s Pritchard and OSU’s Canfield (less notably UCLA and WSU’s two Kevins, Craft and Lopina). If (when) they get playing time, Pritchard’s 19 starts definitely qualify him as seasoned, as do Canfield’s 13 starts. (Craft and Lopina, seven starts between them, are NOT seasoned.)

(I have not formulated a theory that says “a junior quarterback with 15 starts will make money, too,” but on the basis of Jeremiah Masoli’s presence in the Junior list I would really like to.)

Pac 10 quarterbacks entering 2009:

Senior:
OSU, Lyle Moevao/SR (19 GP) (Canfield/SR/13 GP)
ASU, Danny Sullivan/SR (3 GP)

Junior:
Oregon, Jeremiah Masoli/JR (12 GP) (Costa/JR, Thomas/SO)
UW, Jake Locker/JR (13 GP) (Fouch/SO/8 GP)
Cal, Kevin Riley/JR (10 GP) (Mansion/SO, Sweeney/FR)
USC, Aaron Corp/JR (0 GP) (Barkley/FR)

Sophomore:
Arizona, Matt Scott/SO (1 GP) (Foles/SO)
WSU, Marshall Lobbestael/SO (7 GP) (Lopina/SR/2 GP)

Freshman:
Stanford, Andrew Luck (0 GP) (Pritchard/SR/19 GP)
UCLA, Kevin Prince/FR (0 GP) (Craft/SR/~5 GP)

NCAA Football: Offensive Lethality

NCAA 2008 Offensive Lethality

Points divided by Time of Possession; that is, points scored per minute (PPM) of offensive possession.

Team	Off. TOP	Points	PPM
Oklahoma	409.66	716	1.75
Oregon	325.47	545	1.67
Missouri	367.21	591	1.61
Tulsa	412.68	661	1.60
Houston	352.18	528	1.50
Florida	418.94	611	1.46
Texas Tech	391.39	569	1.45
Rice	398.71	537	1.35
Oklahoma St.	402.59	530	1.32
Boise St.	372.22	489	1.31
Texas	420.68	551	1.31
Kansas St.	330.06	419	1.27
Penn St.	410.13	506	1.23
Southern California	400.86	488	1.22
Nevada	423.27	489	1.16
Ball St.	423.81	489	1.15
Utah	418.10	480	1.15
Arizona	415.94	476	1.14
Troy	375.45	426	1.13
BYU	393.11	445	1.13
California	376.09	424	1.13
Kansas	393.11	434	1.10
La.-Lafayette	371.42	397	1.07
Mississippi	390.74	417	1.07
UTEP	371.02	395	1.06
Florida St.	408.40	434	1.06
Nebraska	439.64	460	1.05
LSU	390.53	402	1.03
North Carolina	350.68	360	1.03
Georgia	400.00	409	1.02
Western Mich.	364.68	372	1.02
Baylor	333.05	336	1.01
Akron	358.50	360	1.00
Southern Miss.	396.56	398	1.00
Central Mich.	385.36	384	1.00
Fresno St.	386.43	385	1.00
Illinois	350.15	344	0.98
Buffalo	432.86	424	0.98
Iowa	407.33	394	0.97
TCU	454.50	437	0.96
Oregon St.	414.65	397	0.96
Rutgers	396.56	377	0.95
Alabama	447.24	422	0.94
Bowling Green	353.13	332	0.94
Miami (Fla.)	380.83	352	0.92
Fla. Atlantic	357.57	326	0.91
South Fla.	396.77	359	0.90
Cincinnati	401.31	362	0.90
Texas A&M	333.24	300	0.90
Florida Int’l	328.87	296	0.90
Wisconsin	398.93	357	0.89
Kent St.	347.56	308	0.89
UNLV	349.95	307	0.88
Ohio St.	409.70	359	0.88
Stanford	359.69	315	0.88
Navy	405.82	353	0.87
Pittsburgh	405.39	352	0.87
Clemson	378.03	327	0.87
Air Force	403.02	348	0.86
Louisiana Tech	371.79	320	0.86
Temple	327.08	281	0.86
Northwestern	371.35	317	0.85
West Virginia	375.45	319	0.85
Utah St.	342.79	288	0.84
Memphis	423.91	353	0.83
Iowa St.	367.05	304	0.83
Purdue	357.50	296	0.83
Arkansas St.	391.70	324	0.83
Michigan St.	400.86	326	0.81
SMU	315.55	256	0.81
Hawaii	425.44	345	0.81
Georgia Tech	394.40	317	0.80
Boston College	430.77	346	0.80
Ohio	360.88	289	0.80
Toledo	336.62	269	0.80
Arizona St.	343.98	274	0.80
North Carolina St.	383.20	305	0.80
Notre Dame	404.31	321	0.79
Colorado St.	412.50	327	0.79
Middle Tenn. St.	345.77	274	0.79
Connecticut	409.91	324	0.79
Eastern Mich.	391.30	309	0.79
Maryland	359.08	283	0.79
Louisville	376.99	296	0.79
Minnesota	387.73	302	0.78
Kentucky	380.62	294	0.77
East Carolina	426.36	328	0.77
Indiana	320.12	246	0.77
New Mexico St.	348.36	266	0.76
La.-Monroe	372.61	284	0.76
Northern Ill.	413.14	314	0.76
Marshall	332.25	246	0.74
San Diego St.	312.96	231	0.74
Michigan	329.86	243	0.74
UAB	373.21	273	0.73
Arkansas	363.07	263	0.72
South Carolina	383.85	270	0.70
Colorado	345.37	242	0.70
New Mexico	362.47	253	0.70
Wake Forest	394.62	273	0.69
Virginia Tech	459.31	309	0.67
Syracuse	325.09	217	0.67
Duke	362.08	241	0.67
North Texas	365.85	240	0.66
Idaho	362.47	235	0.65
Vanderbilt	385.57	249	0.65
San Jose St.	350.15	224	0.64
Tennessee	340.60	208	0.61
Miami (Ohio)	365.85	221	0.60
UCF	331.65	199	0.60
UCLA	359.29	212	0.59
Virginia	332.25	193	0.58
Auburn	360.29	208	0.58
Tulane	373.61	200	0.54
Mississippi St.	360.88	183	0.51
Army	378.78	177	0.47
Washington	347.96	159	0.46
Wyoming	346.37	152	0.44
Washington St.	378.68	165	0.44

BCS and the Pac 10 (2008 reprise)

Since the BCS started in 1998, there have been a total of 21 BCS “at
large” berths available (excluding the “required” berths for undefeated non-BCS conference schools). There are only six conferences–Pac 10, the SEC, the Big 10, the Big 12, the Big East, and the ACC–plus Notre Dame to fill those 21 games (remember, I’m excluding the Utahs, Boise States and so on). The Pac 10 has received two of the 21 available at-large berths (2000 and 2002)–one fewer than Notre Dame. The Big 10 has received seven at-large berths; the SEC has received six; the Big 12 has received three. The Big East and ACC haven’t received an at-large berth because they suck.

In those eleven years, the Pac-10 has had schools with records better than the at-large team on three occasions (11-1 Arizona bypassed for 10-1 Ohio State in 1998; 10-1 Oregon bypassed for 9-2 Ohio State and 9-2 Notre Dame in 2005; 10-2 Arizona State bypassed for 9-3 Illinois in 2007) and the same record on three other occasions. The remaining five seasons, two of them the Pac 10 received a berth (2000 and 2002), and three of them the Pac 10 didn’t have a team with a record equivalent to the at-large teams.

Please give us our Rose Bowl back. Which, it so happens in 2008, we get: one-loss USC and one-loss Penn State squaring off. But we used to get that anyway, and in the past the Rose Bowl would have been for a probable share of a national title. This year? It’s not, because one-loss Oklahoma and Florida have been magically designated better.

So, remind me, what do we actually get out of the BCS, again?

Mitigating my outrage in 2008 are two key things–the Pac 10 sucked this year, including the two worst football teams in football history (UW & WSU), and this problem is largely the Pac 10 commissioner’s own fault. He agreed to this stupid BCS plan; Pac 10 football’s not on TV channels that people can see (and perception is a massive ingredient in polls and computer ranking); and, making matters worse, the Pac 10′s bowl games suck (the second best Pac-10 bowl is against the Big 12 number three on December 30).

Round Two: Pac 10 Senior Quarterbacks

I am much less enthusiastic about the “Pac 10 Senior Quarterbacks” theory than I was in 2007, owing to Oregon’s lack of one, but I remain confident that it is a sound theory just the same. In 2007, betting $100 per game on senior Pac-10 QBs against the point spread no matter what, I turned $1,000 into $1,590 in three short months. And you can, too!! And past performance *is* a guaranteed lock on future returns!! (yes, inveterate gambler reader, I was penalizing myself the ‘vig’ in losses)

Veteran Senior Pac-10 Quarterbacks:

1. Arizona, Willy Tuitama (Sr)
2. Arizona State, Rudy Carpenter (Sr)

Juniors:

1. USC, Mark Sanchez (Jr)
2. OSU, Lyle Moevao (Jr)
3. UCLA, Patrick Cowan (Sr)–>Ben Olson (Sr)–>Kevin Craft (Jr)
4. Stanford, T. Ostrander Pritchard (Jr)

Sophomores:

1. Washington, Jake Locker (So)
2. California, Nate Longshore (Sr)–>Riley (So)

Freshman

1. WSU, Rogers(Jr)–> Lopina (Fr)–>Lobbestael (Fr)
2. Oregon, Nate Costa (So)–> Justin Roper (Jr)–>Jeremy Masoli (So)–> Chris Harper (Fr)–>Darron Thomas (Fr)

(This is a difficult conference in which to keep your quarterback upright.)

Week 1: Oregon State at Stanford–I take Stanford plus three points (final: Stanford 36-28/WIN); Michigan State at California–I take California minus 6.5 points (final: California 38-31/WIN); Tennesee at UCLA–I take UCLA plus six points (NO BET–they lost Olson); Idaho at Arizona–I take Arizona minus 29 points (final: 49-0 Arizona/WIN); Northern Arizona at Arizona State–NO LINE. Week One Change: +$300. New total: $1,300.

Week 2: Cal at WSU minus 13.5 (final Cal 66-3… but NO BET because Longshore was benched for the sophomore Riley); Toledo at Arizona minus 24 points (final Arizona 41-16/WIN); Stanford at ASU (Sr. Carpenter vs. Jr Pritchard; I take ASU minus 14.5) (final ASU 41-17/WIN). Change: +$200.  New total: $1,600.

Week 3: Two Seniors left: ASU and Arizona. Arizona vs NMexico (-9.5) (final NMexico 36-28/LOSE); ASU vs UNLV (-25) (final UNLV 23-20/LOSE). Change: -$220. New total: $1,380.

Week 4. Arizona vs UCLA (-3.5) (final Arizona 31-10/WIN); ASU vs Georgia (+7.5) (final Georgia 27-10/LOSE). Change: -$10. New total: $1,370.

Week 5. no Pac 10 senior starters.

Week 6. ASU vs Cal (+9.5) (final ASU loses by 10/LOSS); Arizona vs. Washington (-24) (final Arizona wins by 34/WIN). Change: -$10. New total: $1,360.

Week 7. ASU vs USC (+27) (final ASU loses by 28/LOSS); Arizona vs Stanford (-6.5) (final Arizona loses by 1/LOSS). Change: -$220. New total: $1,140.

Week 8. Cal vs Arizona (+2.5) (Arizona wins by 15/WIN). Change: +$100. New total: $1,240.

Week 9. ASU vs Oregon (+3) (ASU loses by 34/LOSS); Arizona vs USC (+14) (Arizona loses by 7/WIN). Change: -$10. New total: $1,230.

Week 10. ASU vs OSU (+14) (ASU loses by 2/WIN). New total: $1,330.

Week 11. Arizona vs WSU (+40) (Arizona wins by 31/LOSS); ASU vs Washington (-13) (ASU wins by 20/WIN); plus Longshore starts once again for Cal vs. USC (+21.5) (Cal loses by 14/WIN). Change: +90. New total: $1,420.

Week 12. WSU vs ASU (-36) (ASU wins by 31/LOSS); Arizona vs Oregon (+6) (Oregon wins by 10/LOSS). Change: -$220. New total: $1,200.

Week 13. OSU vs Arizona (-3) (ASU loses by 2/LOSS). New total: $1,090.

Week 14. ASU vs UCLA (-9.5) (ASU wins by 25/WIN). New total: $1,190.

Week 15. ASU vs Arizona. Both senior QBs–doesn’t count.

2008 results: 19% ROI. Money.

Killing the cat

What we have here, Adam, is a classic Schrödinger’s cat situation.

As we both know, the dream is dead. Dixon is out for the season along with his top three backups and half of our opening-day depth chart. Stewart, with no other credible threat to divide the attention, is a sitting Duck, and an increasingly gimpy one too. Jaison Williams can’t catch. BCS bloggers are writing disdainful one-liners (and not much more) about Oregon’s “one-trick-pony offense” and predictable collapse. On and on the litany goes.

This is the awful truth — except…

…the two of us haven’t talked since ASU. I’ve tried to call a few times. I’ve composed messages in my head only to have the situation change (that is, worsen) before I could send them along. The last time we actually talked, though, the Ducks were up to #2 and just needed to ride the 51% odds to play for the national championship.

And so it hasn’t all happened yet, not completely, not in a quantum mechanical sense. The Ducks’ season is the cat in the box, laying in a fluctuating state of dead/alive from radioactive isotopes, waiting for us to officially take a peak to send the whole debacle crashing down.

This sense was heightened the other day by a malfunction in my cell phone. It played me a “new” message: my old archenemy Adam wandering the Autzen parking lot in the wake of the USC game, crowds whooping behind him, finally giving up on finding a specific tailgate amid so much celebration and euphoria.

So one option is to never speak to you again, preserving that last shred of possibility like on a DNA sample in cryogenic freeze.

(What does happen, by the way, if Dr. Schrödinger just takes the unopened box and packs it away in the attic unobserved? At some point, the dead/alive cat just kicks it anyway from hunger, right? How does the suspended particle/wave decide when it’s time to stop goofing around and do in the cat? Or does his hearing or not hearing the poor animal’s cries bring things to their natural conclusion anyway?)

If you were less amusing, I admit I’d be tempted to consider ex-communication as a workable strategy. Instead, with a sigh, I guess it’s time to share my observations on a situation that, though trivial, sure feels like it deserves the overused word “tragic.”

First, Dixon’s injury cost us a shot at the national championship, but wasn’t it Costa’s injury — barely reported at the time — that ultimately cost us the Rose Bowl? The post-Dixon offense against Arizona, particularly after Leaf’s injury took away his mobility, and against UCLA was among the worst showings of all time, trailing even the third-string-QB games with last year’s Stanford team and possibly the (deep shudder) Hargain-led Ducks of yore. Yet both games were just sitting there waiting to be won. Wouldn’t Costa, judging from the methodical drives he has conducted every time he’s been inserted in a game, have gotten the job done?

I’m surprised how disappointed I was to hear that Dixon was not invited to the Heisman ceremony. It was a foregone conclusion, but I guess I was still holding out hope. Most everyone agrees he was the best or second-best player, but the sense is that his inability to finish the season, missing the final 2.5 games, disqualifies him from serious consideration.

AND YET there is Colt Brennan, holding his Hawaii-to-NYC ticket, despite having missed two full games late in the season with injury — two games, it is worth noting, that his overrated, struggled-against-the-Huskies (!) team had no real trouble winning without him.

It’s not that the Ducks were a one-man show and couldn’t function without Dixon — an argument that probably could be levelled with some validity against Tebow and the Gator offense. If that’s the classic Dominique Wilkins role, Dixon instead fulfilled the much rarer Magic Johnson/Larry Bird role: he made his teammates better.

Initially that consisted of keeping Stewart on track and, more importantly, getting the most out of a receiving corps that at full health was still a primary cause for concern. Linebackers and wide receivers — those were the subjects of my preseason nightmares. Paysinger and Colvin were good, but nowhere near the quality of our usual top receivers like Howry or Demetrius.

What was amazing about this season was the way Dixon (and Chip Kelly, and the surprisingly good O-line) compensated and even extended the offense despite weekly downgrades in available personnel. People called us a “PlayStation offense” and made it sound like Dixon was just the lead in an all-star juggernaut, but the reality is that the guys he was throwing to were all unproven or had bad hands or were too small or hadn’t lived up to their potential or should honestly have been biding their time on the scout team.

The remarkable thing about this season isn’t the speed with which we collapsed after Dixon’s injury — it’s the fact that we continued to perform at the highest level despite a ridiculous string of injuries that should have humbled any team long before.

I have more to say, particularly about the decision making surrounding Dixon’s continuing to play on a blown knee, the sucker punch seemingly inherent in not informing the rest of the team, the inappropriateness of Bellotti’s churlish reaction to be questioned on it, and so on, but that will have to save for another day.

Go, Ducks.

The Pac 10, Bowls, and the BCS

The BCS is a disaster. Not for everyone, but certainly for the Pac 10. Every year, the Pac-10 goes around the country, plays more than its share of legitimate non-conference games, wins a huge share of those games, then settles into a grueling conference round-robin. Most years, there’s little real argument–the Pac-10 is one of the two or three best football conferences in the country.

Still, like the changing of the seasons, every December you can rely on the BCS snubbing the Pac 10. Let’s take a look:

1998: Snubbed Twice. 1998 Title Game: UCLA wins the Pac 10, 10-1 (8-0) and goes to the Rose Bowl. UCLA is passed over for the national title game by 11-1 (7-1) Florida State, who goes on to lose to undefeated Tennessee. In the 1998 BCS: 11-1 (7-1) Arizona is bypassed for an at-large BCS bid by 10-1 (7-1) Ohio State and a team with a worse record, 9-2 (7-1) Florida.

1999: Not Snubbed. The Pac-10 didn’t have a case for the national title, and only champion Stanford (8-3, 7-1) got an automatic berth. Oregon was the Pac-10′s next best team (8-3, 6-2) but didn’t deserve to move ahead of at-large 9-2 (6-2) Michigan or 9-2 (6-2) Tennessee.

2000: Snubbed Once. 2000 Title game: 10-1 (7-1) Washington was passed over for 11-1 (8-0) Florida State (Miami was snubbed–they’d beaten Florida State–but Washington beat Miami, who beat FSU–so you tell me who was snubbed worse). In the 2000 BCS, the Pac 10 had Washington in the Rose (automatic), and 10-1 (7-1) Oregon State got one of the two available at-large berths (9-2 Notre Dame got the other one).

2001: Snubbed Twice. 2001 Title game: 10-1 (7-1) Oregon is passed over for 11-1 (7-1) Nebraska, despite being ranked second in both the AP & Coaches polls (and despite Nebraska’s 30 point defeat in its final game of the season). In the 2001 BCS, Florida (9-2, 6-2) gets the at-large bid ahead of Washington State (9-2, 6-2).

2002: Not snubbed. 2002 Title game: Two undefeated teams (Ohio State and Miami) met in the championship game; the Pac-10 Champion (Washington State (9-2, 7-1) had no legitimate claim on the title. The BCS selects USC and Iowa (both 9-2, 7-1) for at-large bids.

2003: Snubbed once. 2003 Title game: LSU, Oklahoma, and USC finish with 11-1 records, but USC is dropped from the title game. The BCS at-large bid goes to Ohio State (10-2, 6-2); the Pac-10’s second-best team (Washington State) has three losses, and doesn’t deserve to be included.

2004: Snubbed once. 2004 Title game: USC (12-0, 8-0) goes to the title game against Oklahoma (12-0, 8-0). The Trojans entered the season as defending (co) national champions, held out of the national title game one year earlier, which helped them hold off undefeated teams from the SEC (Auburn) and two other non-BCS conferences. The BCS at-large bid went to Texas (10-1, 7-1) over Cal (10-1, 7-1).

2005: Snubbed once (by two teams). 2005 Title game: USC (12-0, 8-0) goes to the title game against Texas (12-0, 8-0)—there is no controversy there. The BCS at-large bids go to Ohio State (9-2, 7-1) and Notre Dame (9-2), bypassing a one-loss Pac-10 team, Oregon (10-1, 7-1).

2006: Snubbed twice. 2006 Title game: Florida (12-1) and Ohio State (12-0) face off in the title game, and the Pac-10 champion Trojans, with two losses, don’t deserve inclusion. BCS at-large bids go to Michigan (11-1), LSU (10-2), and Notre Dame (10-2). Cal (10-2, 7-2) is passed over for an SEC team and a Notre Dame team with equivalent records. (note that Wisconsin, 11-1, is also left out, but that’s because the Big 10 can only have two teams in the BCS.)

2007: Snubbed once. 2007 Title game: USC (10-2, 6-2) is left out of the national title game in favor of LSU (11-2, 7-2) and Ohio State (11-1, 7-1). I’ll say that’s not a snub (but it’s close). The BCS at-large bids go to Illinois (9-3, 6-2), Georgia (10-2, 6-2), and Kansas (11-1), meaning that one team with a record identical to the second-best Pac-10 team, Arizona State (10-2, 7-2), gets in, as does a Big 10 team with a worse record. (Note that 11-2 Missouri is also left out, but that’s because the Big 12 can only have two teams in the BCS.)

Through 2007, there have been 18 at-large berths in the BCS. The Pac 10 has put teams into those slots just twice (OSU in 2000 and USC in 2002). The Pac 10 has had qualified teams–since 2004, four teams with records identical to the Pac-10′s runner-up have received at-large berths, and two teams with *worse* records than the Pac-10′s runner-up have received at-large berths–the Pac 10′s teams just get overlooked.

What about those two occasions when the Pac 10′s runner up did not get overlooked?

In 2000, the only team other than one-loss OSU with fewer than two losses was Virginia Tech (10-1, 6-1) from the Big East. The BCS picked Notre Dame, with two losses, then was left with one slot for either the Pac-10′s runner up or the Big East’s runner-up. Other than a two-loss Nebraska team, no other non-conference champions from a BCS school had fewer than *three* losses. In short, the choice was to snub either the Big East or the Pac 10.

And 2002? Two at-large slots were again available. The non-championship contenders were Iowa (11-1, 8-0) from the Big Ten, Kansas State (10-2, 6-2) and Texas (10-2, 6-2) from Big 12, USC (11-2, 7-1) from the Pac 10, and a 10-2 Notre Dame team. The BCS took Iowa and USC–the latter having recently beaten Notre Dame. USC had six straight wins (after early losses to K State and WSU), and their record was marginally better than K State’s and Texas’, but, more significantly, K State had just been walloped 35-7 by Oklahoma in the Big 12 Championship game, and Texas hadn’t even qualified for that game. In short, the choice was either to snub a Big 12 team or USC from the Pac 10.

In summary, USC appears able to perturb the BCS machines so that it is treated like a Big 10 or SEC school and not rejected out of hand when competing against teams with equivalent records. But woe unto Pac 10 teams that are not USC: the only way such a team has ever gotten a BCS at-large bid was in a year when every Big 10 and SEC alternative had three or four losses, where they had to choose between OSU or a Big East team.

So here we are, 2007. Three at-large slots, but none for the Pac 10 runner-up. Instead, the Pac 10 is sending everyone but USC to relatively awful and obscure bowl games. Every BCS conference, the Pac 10 included, is guaranteed one $17 million payday for its conference champion (and an additional $4.5 million for additional teams). So, after sticking USC in it’s BCS Pac-10 Champion slot, none of the remaining five Pac-10 bowl teams will play on or after January 1, and together those five will make a total of $6.45 million this year. How does that compare?

The SEC: After subtracting its guaranteed $17 million payday, it is putting eight other teams in bowls (four of which are on or after January 1) and will make $22.15 million this bowl season.

The Big 10: After subtracting its guaranteed $17 million payday, it is putting seven other teams in bowls (two of which are on or after January 1), and will make $18.1 million this bowl season.

The Big 12: After subtracting its guaranteed $17 million payday, it is putting seven other teams in bowl games (three of which are on or after January 1), and will make $16.4 million this bowl season.

The ACC: After subtracting its guaranteed $17 million payday, it is putting seven other teams in bowl games (one of which is on January 1), and will make $12.2 million this bowl season.

The Big East: After subtracting its guaranteed $17 million payday, the eight team Big East puts four other teams in bowl games (none of which is on or after January 1), and will make $3.7 million this bowl season.

Comforting though it is to know the Pac 10 is not at the bottom of the pecking order, wouldn’t it just be better to have our Rose Bowl back?

Sources: various and sundry, including

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2006-12-06-bowl-payouts_x.htm

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/2004_archive_standings.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_NCAA_Division_I-A_football_season