When I got the blog rolling again a year ago, my first post back was my bowl picks. I've historically been very poor at picking bowls, but the blog must have been good luck as I finished in the top 5 percent nationally, largely because I got my top 10 picks correct (pick #11 was LSU over Alabama....whoops). I doubt I'll be able to do that again, but maybe luck will strike twice, so here I am.
After every team's name I will list in order their ranking in Sagarin's pure points measure, FO's FEI rankings, and S&P+ Rankings. I will also include the line as established by Sagarin, F+ (Football Outsider's combination of FEI and S&P+), and Vegas. These metrics will help to shape my opinions, but as you will see, they are far from binding. In most cases, the advanced metrics reflect popular opinion about teams anyway, so you shouldn't see anything too shocking. Without further ado, here are all 35 bowl games in chronological order:
NOTE: One thing I failed to mention is that the points after the picks are confidence picks (from 1 to 35), not my predicted margin of victories.
Nevada (72,69,67) vs. Arizona (34,40,30)
Sagarin: Arizona by 12
F+: Arizona by 17
Vegas: Arizona by 9.5
Do not expect the bowl season to kick off with defense, as neither of these teams are good at it. The rise of Arizona this year has been well publicized, but Nevada can grind out the yards as well with QB Cody Fajardo and RB Stepfon Jefferson. I wouldn't be shocked if this game was closer than the advanced metrics imply, but I still think Arizona will have the edge. Pick: Arizona (26 points)
Toledo (70,46,73) vs. Utah State (25,29,11)
Sagarin: Utah State by 15
F+: Utah State by 12
Vegas: Utah State by 10
It's too bad that the Aggies won't get a chance to test themselves against a better opponent. While a lot of other small school coaches have left for greener pastures this offseason, Aggies coach Gary Andersen has remained. I wouldn't be shocked if Utah State wins the new-fangled Mountain West next year. I would be shocked if they lost this game. Pick: Utah State (32 points)
BYU (21,32,18) vs. San Diego State (49,42,48)
Sagarin: BYU by 9
F+: BYU by 5
Vegas: BYU by 2.5
One of the criticisms of Notre Dame is that they played a lot of close games against bad teams. While this is true of the Purdue and Pitt games, it is not true of the BYU game, because BYU is a sneaky good team. We're used to non-BCS teams gaining fame through dominant offenses, but BYU is a nice counterexample, with one of the best defenses in the country (15th in F+). San Diego State did knock off a similarly defensive minded team when they beat Boise, so I can't put maximum points on this game. I still think BYU is a solid pick. Pick: BYU (23 points)
UCF (51,45,47) vs. Ball State (73,57,62)
Sagarin: UCF by 8
F+: UCF by 4
Vegas: UCF by 7
The CUSA had a very down year, but UCF was probably its best team, and they get a pretty good bowl matchup. Please don't make me analyze this game further. Pick: UCF (13 points)
East Carolina (85,114,90) vs. Lousiana-Lafayette (62,70,60)
Sagarin: ULL by 9
F+: ULL by 16
Vegas: ULL by 6
East Carolina on the other hand, was not the CUSA's best team. The Pirates' ranking of 114 in FEI is the lowest single ranking in any of the three metrics for any bowl team. Louisiana, on the other hand, came this close to beating Florida. I don't feel passionately about this pick, but it still seems like a bit of a mismatch. This may be the Sun Belt's year as the conference has a lot of favorable bowl matchups like this one. Pick: Louisiana-Lafayette (24 points)
Washington (44,53,46) vs. Boise State (33,28,17)
Sagarin: Boise State by 2
F+: Boise State by 16
Vegas: Boise State by 5
There were many disappointments in college football this season, but the biggest one that didn't get a lot of press had to be Keith Price. The Junior saw a dip of 5% in his completion percentage and threw for more than 2 yards less per attempt this year. If you haven't seen Washington since last year's Alamo Bowl, then be aware that this team doesn't have the same firepower. I'm still wary of picking a team with as clunky of an offense as Boise, but they still have a great defense, and they still have Chris Petersen Pick: Boise State (25 points)
Fresno State (28,39,13) vs. SMU (67,89,77)
Sagarin: Fresno State by 12
F+: Fresno State by 22
Vegas: Fresno State by 12
If you are one who believes in prior bowl performances, then you might look at SMU's 45-10 pantsing of a supposedly superior Nevada from the 2009 Hawaii Bowl (SMU's last appearance in this bowl) as some sign that June Jones is a master bowl preparer. However, I'd rather use data from the entirety of this season than one game from three years ago in making my decision. In that case, Fresno is the clear favorite. Pick: Fresno State (34 points)
Western Kentucky (75,66,65) vs. Central Michigan (109,101,99)
Sagarin: WKU by 11
F+: WKU by 11
Vegas: WKU by 5
Central Michigan is probably the worst team in a bowl, while Western Kentucky lost their coach to South Florida on the eve of their first bowl.* I would declare this bowl even more boring than the UCF-Ball State tilt, but at least the Hilltoppers have some nice uniforms. Pick: Western Kentucky (12 points)
* Fun fact from my research: WKU's first bowl was actually a non-sanctioned bowl in 1952. It was called the Refrigerator Bowl and was played in Evansville, Indiana. They won, so in theory there should be a trophy somewhere on WKU's campus commemorating this.
San Jose State (31,36,34) vs. Bowling Green (76,75,71)
Sagarin: SJSU by 14
F+: SJSU by 21
Vegas: SJSU by 7
Much like conference mate Utah State, SJSU didn't exactly land a marquee opponent for their bowl game. Furthermore, coach Mike MacIntyre is off to Colorado.* There's more than a little letdown potential here if you ignore the fact that San Jose State hasn't been this relevant in forever. I think the chance to finish the season ranked will keep them focused enough to cruise to victory. Pick: San Jose State (31 points)
* Given the sorry state of Colorado's program, that has to be the hire of the year thus far. You could sell me on Malzahn to Auburn or Kingsbury to Texas Tech as the best, but I would still pick MacIntyre. I can't believe they got someone good to come clean up that mess.
Cincinnati (45,18,64) vs. Duke (77,94,92)
Sagarin: Cincinnati by 11
F+: Cincinnati by 25
Vegas: Cincinnati by 7
This is a hard bowl to pick. Yes, the metrics have Cincinnati well ahead, but I haven't been impressed by anything I've seen from them. They will also be another team dealing with a coaching transition with Butch Jones off to Tennessee. On the Duke side, Sean Renfree should be able to have a big day in his final game. Plus, being in your first bowl in 17 years is bound to excite the team at least a little. Yes, the smart money is probably with the Bearcats, but if you're not confident in a pick, you might as well pick the upset and then brag if it comes true. Pick: Duke (2 points)
Baylor (18,19,36) vs. UCLA (19,27,32)
Sagarin: Baylor by 1
F+: UCLA by 5
Vegas: Pick
Finally we get a bowl without a heavy favorite. Baylor's biggest win came against a run-heavy team (Kansas State) which suggests that they may be able to defend teams like that better than passing teams. Since UCLA likes to pound it with Jonathan Franklin, this may give Baylor a slight edge. Additionally, I think Baylor has an offense that should be slightly more likely to rally, should they need to. Lastly, there is my notable anti-Jim Mora Jr. bias influencing this pick. He might work out as a college coach, but I am not ready to assume that he will yet. Pick: Baylor (14 points)
Ohio (97,79,104) vs. Louisiana-Monroe (61,60,86)
Sagarin: ULM by 12
F+: ULM by 3
Vegas: ULM by 7
Neither team in this game was able to parlay their early season work (Ohio beating Penn State, ULM knocking off Arkansas) into fully successful seasons. That said, this is a bowl featuring two teams that have at least experiecned a bit of the national stage, so there's still the chance to build on early season momentum. I'm going to continue to roll with the Sun Belt, because I can. Pick: Louisiana-Monroe (17 points)
Rutgers (52,34,59) vs. Virginia Tech (60,55,37)
Sagarin: Rutgers by 2
F+: Rutgers by 1
Vegas: Virginia Tech by 2.5
The Russell Atheltic Bowl seems to have a sense of humor about itself, judging by its Twitter account. That sense of humor will come in handy when watching these offensively-challenged teams square off. Rutgers' defense will be the best unit on the field, but I still trust Logan Thomas slightly more to make the big plays when necessary. Pick: Virginia Tech (4 points)
Minnesota (71,74,75) vs. Texas Tech (26,43,38)
Sagarin: Texas Tech by 15
F+: Texas Tech by 15
Vegas: Texas Tech by 13
It's refreshing to see Minnesota back to their tradition of backing into bowls because of a terrible non-conference slate (they did at least beat Syracuse, though). You could probably say the same thing about Tech's terrible non-conference slates as well, so I guess these teams are even. Their only even in that one regard though, because the Red Raiders should wipe the floor in this one. Pick: Texas Tech (29 points)
Rice (83,85,113) vs. Air Force (93,88,91)
Sagarin: Rice by 3
F+: Rice by 4
Vegas: Rice by 1
The act of writing about games like this one forces me to realize that writing bowl picks post was a stupid idea. I'm all for as many bowls as possible, but neither of these teams ranks in the top 80 in any of the advanced metrics. Rice's season highlight was blocking UCLA's first two extra point attempts in the season opener (which they lost by 28). Air Force's season highlight was hanging with Michigan for 4 quarters. The edge goes to Air Force. Pick: Air Force (9 points)
West Virginia (32,44,33) vs. Syracuse (50,31,49)
Sagarin: West Virginia by 5
F+: Pick
Vegas: West Virginia by 4
Feel free to call me crazy, but I think Orange quarterback Ryan Nassib may go on to have a better pro career than his counterpart in this game, Geno Smith. Both offenses should have big games in this one, so it could very well come down to the end. West Virginia has consistently shown the ability to score late in close games (Baylor, Texas, Oklahoma), so I give them a slight edge here. Pick: West Virginia (6 points)
Navy (78,83,84) vs. Arizona State (16,41,40)
Sagarin: Arizona State by 20
F+: Arizona State by 19
Vegas: Arizona State by 14
Last year, Arizona State was the biggest underdog of the bowl season as they had to face off against a great Boise squad.* This year, they become one of the largest favorites. I'm normally pretty wary about picking against the acadmies with so much confidence, but this is not the same Navy team as in previous years. Pick: Arizona State (30 points)
*Boise not making the BCS last year was a much greater "injustice" than Oklahoma missing out this year, as they were 4th in F+ behind only the top 3 of Alabama, LSU, and Oklahoma State.
Texas (17,20,27) vs. Oregon State (10,14,22)
Sagarin: Oregon State by 3
F+: Oregon State by 4
Vegas: Oregon State by 2
The Alamo Bowl gives us one of the most even matchups of the bowl season. Both teams swooned down the stretch, but that was as much a function of their tough schedules than anything else. I'm slightly more confident in the Beavers because they have two quarterbacks that are better than any of the Longhorns' QBs. Pick: Oregon State (10 points)
TCU (27,24,41) vs. Michigan State (43,23,6)
Sagarin: TCU by 4
F+: Michigan State by 13
Vegas: TCU by 2.5
After going through half of the list with very few disagreements between the lines, we get a big one here. F+ has Michigan State's defense as the best in the country, which explains why they are favored so heavily. It makes sense when you think about how they held Ohio State to 17 points, and kept Michigan out of the end zone entirely. Of course, they still lost both of those games, so they're defense wasn't enough to overcome an offense without a hint of dynamic ability. With stud freshman Devonte Fields, TCU's defense is no slouch either (9th in F+), but they too have struggled to move the ball on offense. In defensive battles like this, I tend to lean towards the team that is more likely to pull off a big offensive play. I think that team is the Horned Frogs. Pick: TCU (8 points)
NC State (63,56,69) vs. Vanderbilt (35,52,50)
Sagarin: Vandy by 7
F+: Vandy by 8
Vegas: Vandy by 6.5
NC State scored one of the biggest upsets of the year with their win against Florida State. Since they clearly have the ability to knock off a superior team, the question is whether or not they can do it again. I'm not as big of a Mike Glennon fan as some, but he should be the superior QB in this game. I don't think that will be enough to topple Vanderbilt, but it should make for a close, exciting game. Pick: Vanderbilt (16 points)
USC (15,25,21) vs. Georgia Tech (58,58,35)
Sagarin: USC by 13
F+: USC by 19
Vegas: USC by 10
USC's season was a bit of a disaster, but I don't see them dropping this game to the Yellow Jackets. Georgia Tech showed some grittiness in tight losses to Virginia Tech, Clemson, and Florida State. Still, those were all losses, and it's tough to see them slowing down an offense that is even more dyanmic than those ones. Pick: USC (28 points)
Iowa State (39,37,57) vs. Tulsa (57,50,54)
Sagarin: Iowa State by 5
F+: Iowa State by 2
Vegas: Pick
Part of what makes picking bowls so hard is lacking a good way to compare teams such as these. Iowa State is clearly a good team, but they're probably the second worst team in their conference (although that conference has a legitimate claim as the best in the nation). Tulsa is also good and was nearly dominant in their conference, but the CUSA lacked quality wins outside the conference this year, and was possibly the worst FBS outfit. When in doubt I'll go with what the models say, and the models are picking Iowa State. Pick: Iowa State (7 points)
LSU (13,13,10) vs. Clemson (22,33,29)
Sagarin: LSU by 4
F+: LSU by 11
Vegas: LSU by 3.5
Clemson's unrivaled playmaking ability seems to be a bit of an ACC mirage, if I am to believe the results of the Clemson-South Carolina game. That said, I don't think they'll have another showing quite as bad as their second half in that game. Still, LSU should play Barkeviously enough to win this game. Pick: LSU (18 points)
Mississippi State (40,67,39) vs. Northwestern (38,22,43)
Sagarin: Northwestern by 1
F+: Northwestern by 16
Vegas: Mississippi State by 2.5
A couple of these Vegas lines have a touch of "SEC bias" in them, none moreso than this one. Northwestern's victory over Vanderbilt is actually the best SEC win between the two teams. The Bulldogs' .500 mark in the league is as soft as possible, because their victories came over the two last place teams in each division. Thus, they don't have the "SEC power" that you would think they would have. Furthermore, Mississippi State didn't play anyone of note out of conference and lost pretty handidly to the four good teams they played. I just don't see how you can make a case that they should be favored against a good Wildcat team that plays as smart as anyone in college football. Northwestern is looking like a good bet to win their first bowl game since 1948. Pick: Northwestern (20 points)
Purdue (65,76,68) vs. Oklahoma State (11,15,24)
Sagarin: Oklahoma State by 18
F+: Oklahoma State by 27
Vegas: Oklahoma State by 16.5
This is probably the biggest mismatch of the bowl season. Purdue looked pretty good in their early season loss to Notre Dame, but they didn't do anything of note after that other than play Ohio State to the wire (in all fairness, most teams were able to do that). Oklahoma State played well even as they shuffled through three different QBs because of injury. I would argue that Purdue's coaching transition could be another factor that hurts them, but losing Danny Hope isn't something that Boilermaker fans will be worrying about. The T Boones should roll. Pick: Oklahoma State (35 points)
South Carolina (12,12,20) vs. Michigan (24,21,19)
Sagarin: South Carolina by 6
F+: Michigan by 2
Vegas: South Carolina by 5
Both of these teams should really benefit from the time off. Michigan will get a chance to get Devin Gardner more reps while working in as many trick plays with Denard Robinson as possible. South Carolina should get the necessary time to fully heal guys like Connor Shaw and JaDeveon Clowney (it blows my mind to remember that he was banged up for the Clemson game). I have to favor the Gamecocks here, but this game could easily go either way. Pick: South Carolina (5 points)
Georgia (7,10,7) vs. Nebraska (29,17,8)
Sagarin: Georgia by 11
F+: Georgia by 5
Vegas: Georgia by 10
A lot of people are calling for a blowout here, but I think those that make such a claim are overrating Georgia a bit. Yes, they were very close to beating Alabama, but they were never able to stop the Tide's running attack, and a freak blocked kick touchdown enabled them to stay close. This year's Nebraska team may not be a vintage Husker squad, but they can run the ball with the best of them. I think the Huskers will keep it close before succumbing in the end. Pick: Georgia (19 points)
Wisconsin (20,11,12) vs. Stanford (9,8,15)
Sagarin: Stanford by 5
F+: Stanford by 6
Vegas: Stanford by 6.5
In addition to the harping on Northern Illinois and Louisville, I heard a lot of people complain about Wisconsin's inclusion in the BCS as well. While a lot of people dismiss Wisconsin for being a 5-loss team, it's important to remember that all of those losses were within a touchdown to teams with winning records. This is not the Wisconsin of the last two years, but it is still a strong team that has a chance to win this game. That being said, Stanford looks better since switching to freshman QB Kevin Hogan, and thus I would still have to favor them. Pick: Stanford (21 points)
Northern Illinois (41,30,55) vs. Florida State (14,16,9)
Sagarin: Florida State by 9
F+: Florida State by 12
Vegas: Florida State by 12.5
I don't like to rely on the whole "motivation" crutch when evaluating bowl games, but if there is ever a bowl in which it might be valid, it is this one. Florida State expected great things to happen this year, but they fell a little short, and now they have to face an overmatched team in their bowl game. Meanwhile, the Huskies have been hearing all about how they don't belong, and they aren't exactly that overmatched that a win would be shocking. I don't see the coaching transition being an issue for them since they swiftly promoted offensive coordinator Rod Carey to the head job. I like Northern Illinois to pull the big upset here. Pick: Northern Illinois (3 points)
Louisville (59,38,56) vs. Florida (6,6,4)
Sagarin: Florida by 19
F+: Florida by 31 (!)
Vegas: Florida by 13
I can't put maximum points on this game because of Florida's offensive ineptitude, but I still don't see Louisville overcoming the Gators' stifling defense. Enjoy what will likely be Matt Elam's final collegiate game. You could call his skillset "Polumalish" if you are inclined to do such a thing. Pick: Florida (33 points)
Oregon (2,2,2) vs. Kansas State (4,1,25)
Sagarin: Oregon by 3
F+: Oregon by 2
Vegas: Oregon by 9.5
It appears that Vegas has an Oregon bias as well, although I can't really disagree with them here. I don't think Kansas State will quite be able to keep up with the dynamism of Oregon, especially since Oregon will have some time to let some of their defensive injuries heal. Regardless, I am still excited to see the matchup that would have happened in September had Kansas State not backed out of it. Pick: Oregon (27 points)
Texas A&M (5,7,3) vs. Oklahoma (8,5,14)
Sagarin: Texas A&M by 2
F+: Oklahoma by 1
Vegas: Texas A&M by 4.5
Here is another rare example of a time when I believe the Vegas line more than the advanced metrics. Oklahoma was very good this year, but A&M is superior in the trenches, which should give them the advantage. This is a must watch game, if only to see the amazing Ryan Swope's final college game. Pick: Texas A&M (22 points)
Pittsburgh (48,35,52) vs. Ole Miss (36,54,23)
Sagarin: Ole Miss by 4
F+: Pittsburgh by 8
Vegas: Ole Miss by 3.5
This is one of my favorite matchups of the bowl season, and not coincidentally, one of the hardest to pick. Both teams hung with top 10 opponents, and were able to improve over the course of the season under their new coaches. There is once again a bit of an SEC bias in the Vegas line, so I think Pitt is the safe pick if you're betting the line. However, I'm still going to pick the Rebels straight up. Pick: Ole Miss (1 point)
Kent State (64,47,61) vs. Arkansas State (54,49,44)
Sagarin: Arkansas State by 3
F+: Kent State by 12
Vegas: Arkansas State by 3.5
My impression from watching a few Kent State games this year is that Spencer Keith is not a very good quarterback, but the defense is good enough to keep them in games even when the offense sputters (see the MAC title game or their upset win over Rutgers for a prime example). I don't think that'll be enough to slow down the Red Wolves potent attack, even without Gus Malzahn. Fun note: Arkansas State lost the aforementioned 1952 Refrigerator Bowl, but at least they had already won it the year prior. Pick: Arkansas State (11 points)
Notre Dame (3,3,5) vs. Alabama (1,4,1)
Sagarin: Alabama by 6
F+: Alabama by 6
Vegas: Alabama by 10
I'm a little surprised that the spread for this game has gotten as high as 10 points. Yes, Alabama is probably the best team in college football, but I don't think the margin between the Tide and ND is anywhere near 10 points. The Irish are basically a prototypical SEC team. I would say we actually compare pretty well to a hypothetical slightly-better version of LSU (focus on the run, amazing front seven). The real version of LSU came very close to knocking off Alabama, so there is definitely an avenue for Notre Dame to do the same. In the end, Alabama's offensive line will probably be just a smidge too strong, and Amari Cooper will make one too many plays. I do hope I'm wrong. Pick: Alabama (15 points)
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Top TV of 2012
As December rolls around, you'll see most websites and publications start to roll out their best-of lists. The only thing that I'm remotely qualified to semi-thoroughly rank is TV shows, so I thought I would dip my toes into the world of entertainment writing. The great part about the golden era of TV in which we find ourselves is that there is such a diverse selection of quality shows. This makes it kind of hard to rank them. Thus, I will begin this post with the disclaimer that this is all highly subjective. Feel free to vehemently disagree with me - your ability to do so is one of the best parts of the internet (per the request of Matt Van, you're now able to comment without logging in, so feel free if you would like to). Also note that a lot of the write-ups will contain SPOILERS, so don't read the section on a show if you're waiting to catch up on it. Now that that's all out of the way, on with the list! But first a few runner-up sections:
Shows that might have been on the list had I watched them
Boardwalk Empire
Game of Thrones
Suburgatory
Bob's Burgers
The Good Wife
American Dad
Southland
The New Girl
Parenthood
There are not enough hours in the day to watch every show that I would like to, so a few good shows that get a lot of buzz will probably never find their way onto my TV. If there's one of these shows in particular that you love and think I'm stupid for missing out on, let me know.
Shows that might have been on the list, but I haven't seen their 2012 efforts:
Treme
Homeland
Girls
Luck
South Park
Yep, I've never had premium cable, so everything from HBO and such has to wait for me. I'm fairly certain Treme would have made the list and would have been pretty high, because it is an awesome show. The others I am less certain about, but based on what I've read and heard and seen from previous years, they would have stood at least a fighting chance. I'm currently going through Luck on the old Netflix queue (yep, we still get the DVDs), so that will not remain unwatched for long. As for South Park, I literally always forget that it's on, and never care enough to catch up with it.
Shows I watch that weren't close to the list:
The Office
Oh, Dunder Mifflin. I am glad there is finally an end date in sight, because it's forced the plot to stop wondering around aimlessly, but it still misses the mark just as often as it hits it. It's easy to forget that this show was consistantly great as recently as season 5 (the Michael Scott paper company arc), and that they could produce an episode as moving as Michael's farewell just two years ago. Since Greg Daniels is back in charge of the show, I am hopeful that they will go out on a reasonably high note, but time will utilmately tell whether my hopes come true or not.
How I Met Your Mother
Speaking of wondering around aimlessly, here is HIMYM. The constant teasing of the mother storyline was good for a while and was still interesting up until a couple of season ago, but now it's just a drag on the show. Furthermore, the whole Robin and Barney will they/won't they is rough, because we already know they're going to at least attempt to get married (and we've known for a while now!) The saving grace is that all the actors are still great even as the material gets weaker (the material can still be pretty good though - see last season's "Ducky Tie"). I definitely am in on HIMYM until the end. Hopefully for the show's sake, that means I only have to watch it until May.
House
House, from what I saw of it, went pretty far downhill in its final seasons. I only caught the finale this year, and it was boring, trite, and pretty much a poor recycling of everything that made the show great in its early years. At least Hugh Laurie and Robert Sean Leonard are free to do other things now.
Modern Family
Here is another show that is coasting on its initial success. Yes, it's still enjoyable to spend a half hour with the Pritchetts and the Dunphys, and the amazing Ty Burrell still deserves all of his Emmy nominations, but nothing of note has really happened on the show since the first season. Gloria's pregnancy has opened up some interesting avenues this season, but the show fails to capitalize meaningfully on them far too often.
Top Chef
A lot of the criticisms of season 9 of Top Chef deal with the seemlingly unpleasant characters (namely Sarah and Lindsay). I believe that those claims are largely unfounded, as I think they happened to just be occasionally snippy, and as a result got a bit of the "villain edit" that is common in reality programming. The true issues with season 9 stemmed from the nature of the competition itself. There were quite simply too many stupid challenges. Whether it was staying up all night to cook barbecue, forcing the contestants to bike to the Alamo, or having a quickfire on a ski lift, the competitors had to do a lot of things not related to cooking. Then of course there was the ridiculously pointless "Last Chance Kitchen," where Nyesha cooked her ass off and still couldn't get back on the show (Remeber that she got eliminated because of a dumb team elimination). The one episode where everyone got to actually cook a dish themselves ("Fit for an Evil Queen" - the one with Charlize Theron) showed how good the show can still be if they get rid of all the stupid stuff and just let talented chefs be creative. Hopefully they remember that for this current season (thus far it's been half good and half bad).
Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23
While all of the other shows in this section are previously good shows nearing the end of their runs, Bitch 23 (as I like to call it) is on the other side of its life cycle. There's a lot of promise here, but the show needs to find its feet a little bit (more viewers couldn't hurt, too). It doesn't help that a lot of the first run episodes from this season were actually meant to be part of last season, which leads to some unevenness. Krysten Ritter's title character rides the line between cartoonish stereotype and actual sympathetic human fairly well, but the show needs to find a more consistent tone before I can consider it among the best shows on TV. It doesn't hurt that James Van Der Beek is always around doing James Van Der Beek things.
Shows I watch that just missed the list:
Children's Hospital
Probably the funniest show that has ever taken place in Brazil. That is all.
Archer
For some reason, I've never loved Archer quite as much as one would think I would. It's got everything from hilarious one-liners to great voice actors to diverse plotlines that mix farce and action with a nice dash of long-term character development. The third season really topped all their previous acheivements as well (especially with the Burt Reynolds episode). I'm looking forward to when Archer starts up again in January.
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia
I've really liked what they've done this season with all of the meta takes on seasons past. There hasn't been much of an actual decline in the show, it's just gotten pushed out of the way by shows that have become better (or ones that have had great years).
30 Rock
30 Rock's final season has afforded it the opportunity to refocus in order to come to a hopefully satisfactory conclusion. As a result, we've gotten the sharpest material about Liz Lemon and company since probably season 3. They seem to have abandoned the interesting plotline concerning Jack's plan to sabotage NBC, but in its place have been some wacky misadventures concerning the presidential campaign, Kenneth's parents, and Liz's love life. It's easy to forget how fresh and superior this show was when it was first on, and I'm glad it's been able to recapture some of that before it bows out.
Show that would have made the list if it didn't get cancelled:
Work of Art: The Next Great Artist
I briefly considered expanding the eligibility period for this list to a year ago today to allow for Work of Art (the season 2 finale was in December), but that seemed like cheating (had I cheated, it probably would have ended up at #9, FWIW). At the same time, I felt I would be remiss if I didn't at least mention the best freaking reality/competition show I've ever seen. The nature of the challenges was pretty ho-hum and occasionally stupid (a la Top Chef). But wow, those contestants. The world of art must be a fun place because if these are the people they can put on TV, just imagine the people that they can't. In the first season, there was the oddly manipulative Miles, and in season two we had the hilariously snarky Sucklord. Of course, there was this contestant, too. And those are just the highlights...pretty much every contestant had some sort of awesome quirk (except for season one winner Abdi, whose "quirk" was that he was the nicest person ever). Contestants weren't the only strength of this show, though. The combination of China Chow's awkwardness, Jerry Saltz's insightfulness, and Simon de Pury's dandyness made for a great set of judges. Finally, John Teti's reviews on the AV Club were a perfect companion piece to the wacky antics on the show. Hopefully, this show finds a home for a third season.
The List
#10 - The League
For its first three seasons, The League was an eminantly quotable, yet ultimately discardable half hour of television. They have never been able to completely ditch the fantasy football premise, which always seemed to drag the show down. They also have always seemed to focus their episodes on building to bizarre finishes that sometimes weren't worth the effort (prime example: the time Andre started lactating). This season the show has finally settled into more of a relaxed groove, and a result, there isn't a show on TV with quite as oddly realized of a universe. For example, in a recent episode "The Tailgate," the show introduced an alternate group of friends (led by Ken Marino as "the seed") so specifically and delightfully defective that they were finally able to match the casual anything-goes tone they've always been aiming for. I may be overrating the show slightly by putting it in the top 10, but I feel it's at its peak now, so I'm fine with it.
#9 - Mad Men
The wife and I have been running through The Sopranos lately (we just finished season 3), and I'm amazed at all of the parallels between it and Mad Men. Both series are character-driven studies of how a group of often despicable men go through their lives. As a result of the character orientation of the shows (as opposed to plot oreintation), we drift through time more than most shows. As a result, these shows are less concerned with documenting everything that happens to these characters and are more interested in showing us what drives the characters and how their minds work (the dream sequences we saw from Don and Roger this season were not unlike Tony's many dreams). Mad Men seemed to be at its finest this season, as all of the major characters faced major crossroads in their lives. Vincent Kartheiser's work as Pete Campbell was the highlight of the season for me, as he struggled with coming to terms with the differences between what he wants to be and what he has become.
#8 - Ben and Kate
Ben and Kate is a tremendous show that's able to mix hijinks and heart with amazing skill considering how early in its run it is. Oscar winner Nat Faxon is predictably amazing as the titular Ben, and Lucy Punch's character BJ has become much more well defined (and as a result, funnier) since the pilot. Because of it's low ratings, I'm not sure how long it will be able to continue its run, so I will implore you: WATCH THIS SHOW NOW!
#7 - Louie
Louis CK's third season of his kinda sorta autobiograpical show saw a few bumps in the road. Specifically, there wasn't anything special about the first five episodes. After that, the series rebounded to its previous highs (although I don't think this season saw an episode as good as "Eddie"). The second half of the season saw CK try some new things with both a longer dramatic arc (the "Late Show" story line) and a truly ridiculous episode ("Barney/Never", in which Louie and Robin Williams inform the employees of a strip club that their favorite client had died. That's the least silly part of the episode). The thing that makes Louie a truly unique show is how you have no idea what to expect from each episode. Nothing illustrates this better than how the tweets from Fake Louie Episodes don't seem very unrealistic at all. As I said earlier, this season seemed to be a step down from CK's previous work, so I'm glad that he's taking the next year off to recharge. I can only imagine how tough it is to come up with the creative ideas necessary for such a good show on top of all of the duties that come with actually bringing it to fruition.
#6 - Happy Endings
Happy Endings is probably the funniest show on television right now. I say that from a subjective perspective, but objectively no other show packs as many jokes, great line readings, and visual humor into 22 minutes as does Happy Endings. The show does a great job of keeping a quick pace with almost a cartoonish sense of bounce to the proceedings, but the manic energy sometimes doesn't help when the show tries to land emotional moments. In fact, I sometimes wish the show would be a little more consistently absurd, because the times when the characters are absurd provide some of the best material they have to offer.
#5 - The Daily Show
At many times throughout this election cycle it was easy to lose perspective. While it often seemed like campaign tactics were worse than ever, it's easy to forget that this was a winning ad less than 50 years ago. So while this may not have been as rough as earlier presedential races, it was certainly the silliest race in a while. And for such a silly race, who better than Jon Stewart to get us all through it? Segments with the news team were sometimes good (especially when the "reporter" in question was Wyatt Cenac), and contributors such as John Hodgman and Kristen Schaal were sharp as ever. However, the heart of the show always resides with Stewart's perfect blend of sarcasm, goofiness, and visible sense of optimistic weariness. While the satire of the show can often seem to blend into pessimism and negativity, Stewart is able to show how he genuinely cares about the state of the nation when he devotes parts of the show to worthy causes such as veterans benefits. He's also improved his interviewing skills greatly to the point where the semi-formal chats will spill over into second and third segments on the web. When he's asked about his place as a journalist, Mr. Stewart always reinforces his position that he's just a comedian. In this day and age though, a good dose of comedy is what's needed to make it all the way through the news.
#4 - Justified
Coming into this season, I knew that it was unlikely that Graham Yost and friends would be able to top Margo Martindale's turn as the Bennett family matriarch, Mags. Neal McDonough's work as the increasingly frantic Quarles wasn't quite as captivating, but the show didn't really miss a beat as it was able to continue building out the strange world of Harlan County. No show on TV is better at quickly building interesting and layered characters (and since they often kill those characters off immediately, it's good that they're skilled at incorporating new ones). Regardless of which characters are around causing trouble, I will always watch a show with Timothy Olyphant and Walton Goggins. Their mix of antagonism despite similar beginnings provides the base on which the show stands.
#3 - Parks and Recreation
Todd VanDerWerff's recent article on Suburgatory recalled to mind a thought that I've often had. Specifically, the headline which called a comedy a drama spoke to a dichotomy that I often fail to see. I don't necessarily think there is such a thing as a "comedy" or a "drama," but rather a spectrum where those two concepts sit on opposing ends. Both Parks and Rec and Communiy find themselves above some weighty dramas on my list, and a big part of the reason for this is that they are able to put their well developed characters into real dramatic situations that pay off just as well as more serious shows. This year alone, Parks and Recreation has done three of its most memorable scenes: Leslie reading her closing remarks at the debate, Leslie voting for herself in the city council election (and subsequently winning), and Leslie and Ben's proposal. The quality of these moments speaks to well Michael Schur and company have been able to construct a world, zany as it is, that feels real and honest enough to earn these moments. You can certainly point to a few faults as the show ages (Andy is getting a little too dumb, Chris often doesn't have enough to do), but it's still one of the best shows on television.
#2 - Community
Since October 19th hasn't come yet this year, this ranking is based only on the back half of the most recent season. While it is true that season three was not as consistently funny as previous seasons, there were still enough amazing episodes to justify placing the show this high on the list. The high point of the season (and perhaps the series) "Remedial Chaos Theory" was aired in 2011, but 2012 still saw the ridiculous Subway arc ("Who were you, Subway?" is a line that makes me crack up every time I think of it), the blanket and pillow fort two-parter, and an even more clever flashback episode than last season. If that wasn't enough, we got to see the inner workings of the surreal air conditioner repair school as well as the best Law and Order parody to date. However, what truly makes Community a great show is that in addition to the humor, there is a real sense of purpose. We've seen a lot of realistic, organic growth from the characters (especially Troy) as a result of their interactions with each other. The heart of Community is just that, a sense of community that helps people and their society grow.
#1 - Breaking Bad
I said before the final season began that Breaking Bad had roughly a 15% chance of passing The Wire as my favorite drama of all time, and it's a testament to the strength of this season that that figure has at the very least held steady. The first half of season five of Breaking Bad had the tall order of setting everything up for the final run of the show, which begins next summer. Other than the uneven table-setting premiere, every other episode was A-level work from Vince Gilligan and company. Even though we only got eight episodes in this run, the show managed to pack in as much as always, with the highlights including an incredibly creepy dinner, a strangely funny assassination montage, and a freaking train robbery.
One of my favorite parts of the show is how well the planning and foresight of the creators is used to create a maximum level of suspense and tension. An example from this season is probably the best display of this. The cold open of the premiere showed us Walt in the not too distant future. He appeared to be nervous and perhaps slightly sickened. He also had a fake license from New Hampshire and was buying a machine gun at a Denny's from everyone's favorite character actor, Jim Beaver. This sequence served to cast a shadow over the precedings of the season. No matter how good things seemed for Walt and company, there was always a sense of dread lurking not too far in the distance. This was clearly on display in the end of the finale when the Whites and Schraders were enjoying a seemingly innocuous lunch by the pool. Had we not seen future Walt, we probably wouldn't think anything of this scene, but instead it was filled with tension, causing the viewer to wonder if something terrible would befall them right then. The ability to imbue such dread into such a placid scene is one of the truly amazing things about this show. I'm excited to see the final payoff next summer.
Shows that might have been on the list had I watched them
Boardwalk Empire
Game of Thrones
Suburgatory
Bob's Burgers
The Good Wife
American Dad
Southland
The New Girl
Parenthood
There are not enough hours in the day to watch every show that I would like to, so a few good shows that get a lot of buzz will probably never find their way onto my TV. If there's one of these shows in particular that you love and think I'm stupid for missing out on, let me know.
Shows that might have been on the list, but I haven't seen their 2012 efforts:
Treme
Homeland
Girls
Luck
South Park
Yep, I've never had premium cable, so everything from HBO and such has to wait for me. I'm fairly certain Treme would have made the list and would have been pretty high, because it is an awesome show. The others I am less certain about, but based on what I've read and heard and seen from previous years, they would have stood at least a fighting chance. I'm currently going through Luck on the old Netflix queue (yep, we still get the DVDs), so that will not remain unwatched for long. As for South Park, I literally always forget that it's on, and never care enough to catch up with it.
Shows I watch that weren't close to the list:
The Office
Oh, Dunder Mifflin. I am glad there is finally an end date in sight, because it's forced the plot to stop wondering around aimlessly, but it still misses the mark just as often as it hits it. It's easy to forget that this show was consistantly great as recently as season 5 (the Michael Scott paper company arc), and that they could produce an episode as moving as Michael's farewell just two years ago. Since Greg Daniels is back in charge of the show, I am hopeful that they will go out on a reasonably high note, but time will utilmately tell whether my hopes come true or not.
How I Met Your Mother
Speaking of wondering around aimlessly, here is HIMYM. The constant teasing of the mother storyline was good for a while and was still interesting up until a couple of season ago, but now it's just a drag on the show. Furthermore, the whole Robin and Barney will they/won't they is rough, because we already know they're going to at least attempt to get married (and we've known for a while now!) The saving grace is that all the actors are still great even as the material gets weaker (the material can still be pretty good though - see last season's "Ducky Tie"). I definitely am in on HIMYM until the end. Hopefully for the show's sake, that means I only have to watch it until May.
House
House, from what I saw of it, went pretty far downhill in its final seasons. I only caught the finale this year, and it was boring, trite, and pretty much a poor recycling of everything that made the show great in its early years. At least Hugh Laurie and Robert Sean Leonard are free to do other things now.
Modern Family
Here is another show that is coasting on its initial success. Yes, it's still enjoyable to spend a half hour with the Pritchetts and the Dunphys, and the amazing Ty Burrell still deserves all of his Emmy nominations, but nothing of note has really happened on the show since the first season. Gloria's pregnancy has opened up some interesting avenues this season, but the show fails to capitalize meaningfully on them far too often.
Top Chef
A lot of the criticisms of season 9 of Top Chef deal with the seemlingly unpleasant characters (namely Sarah and Lindsay). I believe that those claims are largely unfounded, as I think they happened to just be occasionally snippy, and as a result got a bit of the "villain edit" that is common in reality programming. The true issues with season 9 stemmed from the nature of the competition itself. There were quite simply too many stupid challenges. Whether it was staying up all night to cook barbecue, forcing the contestants to bike to the Alamo, or having a quickfire on a ski lift, the competitors had to do a lot of things not related to cooking. Then of course there was the ridiculously pointless "Last Chance Kitchen," where Nyesha cooked her ass off and still couldn't get back on the show (Remeber that she got eliminated because of a dumb team elimination). The one episode where everyone got to actually cook a dish themselves ("Fit for an Evil Queen" - the one with Charlize Theron) showed how good the show can still be if they get rid of all the stupid stuff and just let talented chefs be creative. Hopefully they remember that for this current season (thus far it's been half good and half bad).
Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23
While all of the other shows in this section are previously good shows nearing the end of their runs, Bitch 23 (as I like to call it) is on the other side of its life cycle. There's a lot of promise here, but the show needs to find its feet a little bit (more viewers couldn't hurt, too). It doesn't help that a lot of the first run episodes from this season were actually meant to be part of last season, which leads to some unevenness. Krysten Ritter's title character rides the line between cartoonish stereotype and actual sympathetic human fairly well, but the show needs to find a more consistent tone before I can consider it among the best shows on TV. It doesn't hurt that James Van Der Beek is always around doing James Van Der Beek things.
Shows I watch that just missed the list:
Children's Hospital
Probably the funniest show that has ever taken place in Brazil. That is all.
Archer
For some reason, I've never loved Archer quite as much as one would think I would. It's got everything from hilarious one-liners to great voice actors to diverse plotlines that mix farce and action with a nice dash of long-term character development. The third season really topped all their previous acheivements as well (especially with the Burt Reynolds episode). I'm looking forward to when Archer starts up again in January.
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia
I've really liked what they've done this season with all of the meta takes on seasons past. There hasn't been much of an actual decline in the show, it's just gotten pushed out of the way by shows that have become better (or ones that have had great years).
30 Rock
30 Rock's final season has afforded it the opportunity to refocus in order to come to a hopefully satisfactory conclusion. As a result, we've gotten the sharpest material about Liz Lemon and company since probably season 3. They seem to have abandoned the interesting plotline concerning Jack's plan to sabotage NBC, but in its place have been some wacky misadventures concerning the presidential campaign, Kenneth's parents, and Liz's love life. It's easy to forget how fresh and superior this show was when it was first on, and I'm glad it's been able to recapture some of that before it bows out.
Show that would have made the list if it didn't get cancelled:
Work of Art: The Next Great Artist
I briefly considered expanding the eligibility period for this list to a year ago today to allow for Work of Art (the season 2 finale was in December), but that seemed like cheating (had I cheated, it probably would have ended up at #9, FWIW). At the same time, I felt I would be remiss if I didn't at least mention the best freaking reality/competition show I've ever seen. The nature of the challenges was pretty ho-hum and occasionally stupid (a la Top Chef). But wow, those contestants. The world of art must be a fun place because if these are the people they can put on TV, just imagine the people that they can't. In the first season, there was the oddly manipulative Miles, and in season two we had the hilariously snarky Sucklord. Of course, there was this contestant, too. And those are just the highlights...pretty much every contestant had some sort of awesome quirk (except for season one winner Abdi, whose "quirk" was that he was the nicest person ever). Contestants weren't the only strength of this show, though. The combination of China Chow's awkwardness, Jerry Saltz's insightfulness, and Simon de Pury's dandyness made for a great set of judges. Finally, John Teti's reviews on the AV Club were a perfect companion piece to the wacky antics on the show. Hopefully, this show finds a home for a third season.
The List
#10 - The League
For its first three seasons, The League was an eminantly quotable, yet ultimately discardable half hour of television. They have never been able to completely ditch the fantasy football premise, which always seemed to drag the show down. They also have always seemed to focus their episodes on building to bizarre finishes that sometimes weren't worth the effort (prime example: the time Andre started lactating). This season the show has finally settled into more of a relaxed groove, and a result, there isn't a show on TV with quite as oddly realized of a universe. For example, in a recent episode "The Tailgate," the show introduced an alternate group of friends (led by Ken Marino as "the seed") so specifically and delightfully defective that they were finally able to match the casual anything-goes tone they've always been aiming for. I may be overrating the show slightly by putting it in the top 10, but I feel it's at its peak now, so I'm fine with it.
#9 - Mad Men
The wife and I have been running through The Sopranos lately (we just finished season 3), and I'm amazed at all of the parallels between it and Mad Men. Both series are character-driven studies of how a group of often despicable men go through their lives. As a result of the character orientation of the shows (as opposed to plot oreintation), we drift through time more than most shows. As a result, these shows are less concerned with documenting everything that happens to these characters and are more interested in showing us what drives the characters and how their minds work (the dream sequences we saw from Don and Roger this season were not unlike Tony's many dreams). Mad Men seemed to be at its finest this season, as all of the major characters faced major crossroads in their lives. Vincent Kartheiser's work as Pete Campbell was the highlight of the season for me, as he struggled with coming to terms with the differences between what he wants to be and what he has become.
#8 - Ben and Kate
Ben and Kate is a tremendous show that's able to mix hijinks and heart with amazing skill considering how early in its run it is. Oscar winner Nat Faxon is predictably amazing as the titular Ben, and Lucy Punch's character BJ has become much more well defined (and as a result, funnier) since the pilot. Because of it's low ratings, I'm not sure how long it will be able to continue its run, so I will implore you: WATCH THIS SHOW NOW!
#7 - Louie
Louis CK's third season of his kinda sorta autobiograpical show saw a few bumps in the road. Specifically, there wasn't anything special about the first five episodes. After that, the series rebounded to its previous highs (although I don't think this season saw an episode as good as "Eddie"). The second half of the season saw CK try some new things with both a longer dramatic arc (the "Late Show" story line) and a truly ridiculous episode ("Barney/Never", in which Louie and Robin Williams inform the employees of a strip club that their favorite client had died. That's the least silly part of the episode). The thing that makes Louie a truly unique show is how you have no idea what to expect from each episode. Nothing illustrates this better than how the tweets from Fake Louie Episodes don't seem very unrealistic at all. As I said earlier, this season seemed to be a step down from CK's previous work, so I'm glad that he's taking the next year off to recharge. I can only imagine how tough it is to come up with the creative ideas necessary for such a good show on top of all of the duties that come with actually bringing it to fruition.
#6 - Happy Endings
Happy Endings is probably the funniest show on television right now. I say that from a subjective perspective, but objectively no other show packs as many jokes, great line readings, and visual humor into 22 minutes as does Happy Endings. The show does a great job of keeping a quick pace with almost a cartoonish sense of bounce to the proceedings, but the manic energy sometimes doesn't help when the show tries to land emotional moments. In fact, I sometimes wish the show would be a little more consistently absurd, because the times when the characters are absurd provide some of the best material they have to offer.
#5 - The Daily Show
At many times throughout this election cycle it was easy to lose perspective. While it often seemed like campaign tactics were worse than ever, it's easy to forget that this was a winning ad less than 50 years ago. So while this may not have been as rough as earlier presedential races, it was certainly the silliest race in a while. And for such a silly race, who better than Jon Stewart to get us all through it? Segments with the news team were sometimes good (especially when the "reporter" in question was Wyatt Cenac), and contributors such as John Hodgman and Kristen Schaal were sharp as ever. However, the heart of the show always resides with Stewart's perfect blend of sarcasm, goofiness, and visible sense of optimistic weariness. While the satire of the show can often seem to blend into pessimism and negativity, Stewart is able to show how he genuinely cares about the state of the nation when he devotes parts of the show to worthy causes such as veterans benefits. He's also improved his interviewing skills greatly to the point where the semi-formal chats will spill over into second and third segments on the web. When he's asked about his place as a journalist, Mr. Stewart always reinforces his position that he's just a comedian. In this day and age though, a good dose of comedy is what's needed to make it all the way through the news.
#4 - Justified
Coming into this season, I knew that it was unlikely that Graham Yost and friends would be able to top Margo Martindale's turn as the Bennett family matriarch, Mags. Neal McDonough's work as the increasingly frantic Quarles wasn't quite as captivating, but the show didn't really miss a beat as it was able to continue building out the strange world of Harlan County. No show on TV is better at quickly building interesting and layered characters (and since they often kill those characters off immediately, it's good that they're skilled at incorporating new ones). Regardless of which characters are around causing trouble, I will always watch a show with Timothy Olyphant and Walton Goggins. Their mix of antagonism despite similar beginnings provides the base on which the show stands.
#3 - Parks and Recreation
Todd VanDerWerff's recent article on Suburgatory recalled to mind a thought that I've often had. Specifically, the headline which called a comedy a drama spoke to a dichotomy that I often fail to see. I don't necessarily think there is such a thing as a "comedy" or a "drama," but rather a spectrum where those two concepts sit on opposing ends. Both Parks and Rec and Communiy find themselves above some weighty dramas on my list, and a big part of the reason for this is that they are able to put their well developed characters into real dramatic situations that pay off just as well as more serious shows. This year alone, Parks and Recreation has done three of its most memorable scenes: Leslie reading her closing remarks at the debate, Leslie voting for herself in the city council election (and subsequently winning), and Leslie and Ben's proposal. The quality of these moments speaks to well Michael Schur and company have been able to construct a world, zany as it is, that feels real and honest enough to earn these moments. You can certainly point to a few faults as the show ages (Andy is getting a little too dumb, Chris often doesn't have enough to do), but it's still one of the best shows on television.
#2 - Community
Since October 19th hasn't come yet this year, this ranking is based only on the back half of the most recent season. While it is true that season three was not as consistently funny as previous seasons, there were still enough amazing episodes to justify placing the show this high on the list. The high point of the season (and perhaps the series) "Remedial Chaos Theory" was aired in 2011, but 2012 still saw the ridiculous Subway arc ("Who were you, Subway?" is a line that makes me crack up every time I think of it), the blanket and pillow fort two-parter, and an even more clever flashback episode than last season. If that wasn't enough, we got to see the inner workings of the surreal air conditioner repair school as well as the best Law and Order parody to date. However, what truly makes Community a great show is that in addition to the humor, there is a real sense of purpose. We've seen a lot of realistic, organic growth from the characters (especially Troy) as a result of their interactions with each other. The heart of Community is just that, a sense of community that helps people and their society grow.
#1 - Breaking Bad
I said before the final season began that Breaking Bad had roughly a 15% chance of passing The Wire as my favorite drama of all time, and it's a testament to the strength of this season that that figure has at the very least held steady. The first half of season five of Breaking Bad had the tall order of setting everything up for the final run of the show, which begins next summer. Other than the uneven table-setting premiere, every other episode was A-level work from Vince Gilligan and company. Even though we only got eight episodes in this run, the show managed to pack in as much as always, with the highlights including an incredibly creepy dinner, a strangely funny assassination montage, and a freaking train robbery.
One of my favorite parts of the show is how well the planning and foresight of the creators is used to create a maximum level of suspense and tension. An example from this season is probably the best display of this. The cold open of the premiere showed us Walt in the not too distant future. He appeared to be nervous and perhaps slightly sickened. He also had a fake license from New Hampshire and was buying a machine gun at a Denny's from everyone's favorite character actor, Jim Beaver. This sequence served to cast a shadow over the precedings of the season. No matter how good things seemed for Walt and company, there was always a sense of dread lurking not too far in the distance. This was clearly on display in the end of the finale when the Whites and Schraders were enjoying a seemingly innocuous lunch by the pool. Had we not seen future Walt, we probably wouldn't think anything of this scene, but instead it was filled with tension, causing the viewer to wonder if something terrible would befall them right then. The ability to imbue such dread into such a placid scene is one of the truly amazing things about this show. I'm excited to see the final payoff next summer.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
College Football: End of the Season
After all is said and done, we are left with perhaps the two most famous programs in history squaring off for the national title. As a Notre Dame fan, I am obviously very excited, but I'm also pretty geeked as a college football fan. I am very appreciative of spread offenses, and the diversity of attacks that college football provides is one of the big reasons that I prefer it to the pro game, but I'll be happy to watch two relatiely old fashioned squads duke it out for the championship.
I'm glad that Alabama beat out Georgia for reasons other than tradition, too. Alabama is probably the best team in the nation this year, so what better of an opponent for ND to prove for once and all that it is back.* Had Georgia beaten Alabama after being outplayed (which is almost what happened), then there could have been a debate about whether or not beating Georgia would necessarily prove anything. Instead, the matchup against the Tide gives ND every opportunity to silence their doubters and validate their fans. I cannot wait. January 7th is a long way away.
* Of course, in most practical definitions of the word, Notre Dame is already "back" (if they even went anywhere), but since the goal of the program seems to be winning titles, the Irish need to do so to be all the way back, in the strictest sense of the term.
One More Quick Note on Conferences
One of the assumptions that you'll see when people invoke the conference fallacy is the assumption that the SEC is far and away the best conference. Yes, there are 6 teams in the top 15 and a few other teams look feisty, so the advantage of the strength at the top is undeniable. However, I don't think it's that cut and dry. In truth, you can get very different answers to the question of "which conference is best" depending on what you think makes a conference good.
To understand this differing of opinion, let's examine a source that would disagree with the initial assumption. One such source would be famous statistician Jeff Sagarin. If you look at Sagarin's conference measures, he actually has the Big 12 a little bit above the SEC in both his simple average and central mean calculations. The reason for this is pretty clear: In those measurements he's taking the whole conference into account and when you do that, you'll find that the Big 12 is deeper than the SEC. Examining his pure points predictor, we can see that the second worst team in the Big 12 is Iowa State at 39th. The SEC has a whopping 6 teams with a lower rank than that, which is what drags them down in Sagarin's estimation. I think what we see here is a small symptom of the super-conference fad. That is, smaller conferences will have higher variance in overall quality since they have fewer members, and will have better shots at being the best conference overall (of course, they'll also have a better chance at flaming out as well). The larger conferences, on the other hand, are far more likely to have one or more terrible teams that drag the conference as a whole down in measures such as Sagarin's.
If you instead choose to weight the strength of the top teams in the conference, like many appear to do, then I could see how you could arrive at the conclusion that the SEC is the best. I could even get behind this as a reasonable framework with one caveat: You would need to make sure that you're not overrating these top teams because of their performance against a weak bottom of a conference. The top six teams in the SEC went 30-0 against the rest of the SEC, which suggests that the top teams' records may be a little inflated. That being said, both the top and the bottom of the conference have good enough non-conference resumes to justify the strength of those subdivisions*. As a result, I can understand and support either argument. The main poin from my conference fallacy post still stands though: Just because you win the best conference doesn't make you the best team. Alabama deserves to be in the title game not simply because they won the SEC, but because they demonstrated all season that they were one of the best (if not the best) teams in the nation.
*The top 6 teams passed all of their non-conference tests with flying colors, and even bottom teams like Kentucky (Kent State) and Tennessee (NC State) picked up some nice wins.
My Heisman Ballot
1. Manti Te'o
As a Notre Dame fan, I've been reading a lot of arguments about why Manti should win the Heisman. Many of them laud Manti for being a high character guy and for leading his team to a 12-0 record. These are great things and are very true, but for me the argument for Manti comes down to this:
He was really great at football this year, and there is no runaway candidate.
The first part of the sentence should be obvious to everyone. In case it isn't, remember that this happened. The second part is true a lot more often than you probably think, and is what I'm going to talk about. I think that the Heisman is as difficult to award as any major sports award, because of the nature of college football. You have amazing athletes on 124 teams playing 10 different positions and getting just 12 or 13 games to make their arguments. Given how there are often a large cluster of players that likely provide about the same amount of value to their teams, it can be impossible to narrow down the field. As a result, I have trouble getting too worked up about the Heisman. Yes, I was disappointed when Mark Ingram won (since he was the second best RB on his team), but in general this isn't like baseball where you can often point to solid quantifiable reasons for one candidate.
As for the arguments I mentioned at the beginning, let's deal with those. The character argument usually rubs me the wrong way. Yes, it seems apparent that Manti is a great guy, but a lot of your behavior at that age is determined by your background. Using this as a justification for the Heisman would seem to unfarily discriminate against those from less stable backgrounds. Plus, as much as we think we know these athletes, we really don't. The 12-0 argument is also weak. Yes, A&M lost two more games, but they were both single digit losses to top ten teams. If Pitt makes a short field goal, and A&M's defense forces one more crucial turnover against LSU, then we could be looking at two 11-1 teams. Basically, two not unlikely plays that wouldn't have involved the candidates at hand could have rendered this argument moot. Most advanced metrics show that Texas A&M is just slightly worse (or in the case of S&P+, slightly better) than Notre Dame, so it's not like we're talking about a wide gulf in team quality anyway. In the end, I choose Manti for his skill and his leadership, but with the important caveat that it's really just a guess as to who the most outstanding player of this season was.
2. Johnny Manziel
3. Jadeveon Clowney
One of the more peculiar occurances in conference realignment is that Texas A&M and South Carolina are set to become yearly cross-divisional "rivals", but unfortunately that won't start until 2014, when Jadeveon will likely be terrorizing quarterbacks for money. It's too bad because I would have loved to see Manziel try to wriggle his way away from Mr. Clowney. Perhaps they will meet in Atlanta next year at the SEC championship.
4. Jordan Lynch
5. Marqise Lee
I am also grouping these two together because at this rate with all the conference shenanigans, Northern Illinois and USC will be playing in the PAC-12 title game next year. So we will get to see these two play against each other. Sweet.*
* I really don't have strong feelings, positive or negative, about all of the conference realignment going on so I pretty much just resort to sarcasm when talking about it.
Rankings
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. Texas A&M
5. Florida
6. Ohio State
7. LSU
8. Kansas State
9. Stanford
10. Georgia
11. Oklahoma
12. South Carolina
13. Florida State
14. Clemson
15. Utah State
16. Northern Illinois
17. Oregon State
18. UCLA
19. Nebraska
20. Texas
21. Northwestern
22. Vanderbilt
23. San Jose State
24. Michigan
25. Wisconsin
Also Considered: Oklahoma State, Baylor, Boise State, USC, Kent State
Notes on the rankings:
- Here was an interesting letter in Stewart Mandel's mailbag at SI:
1. Their victories over each other were not created equally. Last year, Oregon dominated Stanford by three touchdowns. Stanford took overtime to beat Oregon this year. Both wins are undoubtedly impressive, but Oregon's 2011 win was more impressive.
2. Oregon and Stanford were of roughly the same quality last year, whereas Oregon seems to be a bit better this year. To support this, I cite the fact that Oregon has blown out every non-Stanford opponent this year, while Stanford has had a little more trouble with some of the same opponents. The prime example of this is how Oregon shut out Arizona 49-0, while Stanford had to stage a furious comeback just to force overtime against the Wildcats.
3. Mandel touches on this briefly, but Stanford's loss to 7-5 Washington is pretty weak, even though it was on the road. Oregon's second loss last year was to the far superior USC, who I had #4 at the end of that season. Advantage Oregon.
- All of the talk today is about whether or not Northern Illinois will make a BCS bowl. As I type this, it appears to be too close to call. Naturally, I have a few thoughts about this:
1. I'm a little disappointed that Utah State hasn't gotten more serious consideration from the voters. Most advanced stats have them ahead of Northern Illinois, and they dominated their schedule a bit more than the Huskies, collecting road wins over both Louisiana Tech and San Jose State. Also Northern Illinois' loss came to 4-8 Iowa, while Utah State lost by a total of 5 points in road games against Wisconsin and the underrated BYU.
2. In spite of any arguments you can make for these non-BCS teams, there shouldn't be any outrage if they don't make the top 16. This is not a great year for the non-BCS teams, as there isn't a team anywhere near as strong as the Boises and TCUs of yesteryear (largely because most of those teams are in BCS conferences now). That being said, there are so many inherent disadvantages towards the non-BCS conferences that I won't feel too bad if they "steal" a berth this year.
- In spite of a sometimes lackluster season, Wisconsin appears at the bottom of my rankings because it's impossible to watch a team that thoroughly decimate someone and not put them in my top 25. All of their losses were close ones to good teams, so the Badgers weren't too far off from being a really good team this year anyway. Because of Wisconsin's win, there's a lot of consternation around the internet about a 5-loss team making it's way into a BCS bowl, and how the system is bad as a result. It's important to remember though that the system has nothing to do with Ohio State and Penn State behaving badly and very badly, respectively. There are a lot of arguments to be made against the BCS, but I don't think this is one of them.
- Speaking of thorough domination, there's my Huskers checking in at 19. I still have no idea where to rank this team, just like I haven't had any idea all season. They've blown teams out, gotten blown out, won close games when the score is high, lost close games when the score is high, and even won a couple of defensive battles. To say that this is the most schizophrenic team in the nation would perhaps be an understatement. At least they can hang their hats on a 10 win season and a New Year's Day bowl. And that will truly be a bowl where anything can happen.
Top Games of the Year:
There is no firm criteria for this list. I just want to reward the games that entertained me the most. Things that lead to my entertainment are:
1. Teams playing to the best of their abilities. This doesn't mean you have to be objectively great (though that doesn't hurt), you just have to be doing your best. Think Pitt vs. West Virginia in 2007.
2. The stakes have to be reasonably high. Not every game on this list has to be for the national title, but you have to be playing for more than pride.
3. If either #1 or #2 don't qualify, then there has to be something truly remarkable about the game. None of the games on this year's list fall to this criterion, but that 7 OT Arkansas - Ole Miss game would.
Runners-up: ND-Oklahoma, Kansas State-Baylor, Florida State-NC State, Nebraska-Michigan State
5. Alabama 21, LSU 17 - This is actually the earliest game on the list, which shows how this season didn't really ramp up until the end. The CBS night game is often amazing (UF-LSU in 2007, LSU-Bama last year), and this game didn't fail to excite. LSU played its best game of the year, and Alabama finished the game with the best drive of the year. Unfortunately for this game (and fortunately for college football fans), it was overshadowed by later games.
4. Stanford 17, Oregon 14 - This game gets a couple of bonus points for being brilliantly scheduled alongside the KSU-Baylor game so fans of Notre Dame and the SEC could watch all the dominos fall at once. Of all the performances I've seen this year, the effort from Stanford's defense in this game has to be the best. No other team came remotely close to slowing down Oregon, and Stanford was able to put on a clinic. Oregon still did collect 400 yards, so it wasn't as if they embarassed themselves, but they did show that they are just as stoppable as everyone else.
3. Alabama 32, Georgia 28 - This may be a controversial opinion, but I didn't think this game was as great as everyone else thought. Yes, the stakes were ridiculously high, and yes, we saw a lot of great and memorable performances and plays. However, way too many poor plays and decisions dominated the game. Murray and McCarron both made some boneheaded throws against good but not great secondaries. Georgia didn'r figure out that it should maybe have more than three down lineman until it was too late. And of course, there was the final drive, in which someone should have been screaming "SPIKE THE BALL." This game still gets ranked #3 on my list, because it's probably the first truly memorable SEC title game ever, but neither team played up to their abilities.
2. Utah State 48, Louisiana Tech 41 - The death throes of the WAC turned out to be one of the best under the radar storylines of the year. Three actually good teams battled it out (SJSU being the other) to claim the WAC crown in perpetuity. This game featured an amazing rally by the Bulldogs only to see the Aggies clean up in overtime and take the conference. It didn't hurt that this game was played in one of my favorite outposts in college football, Ruston, Louisiana. Every game I watch there manages to sound both incredbly loud and incredibly small at the same time.
1. Texas A&M 29, Alabama 24 - This game had about everything you could want. Two great teams playing their "A" games. A star being born in Johnny Manziel. A defending champion (and perhaps eventual champion) getting pinned down early and fighting back hard. A tight finish with plenty of drama to go around, resulting in one of the biggest upsets of the season. I hope the title game is as good as this one was. Or it could be an ND blowout, you know. That'd be cool, too.
I'm glad that Alabama beat out Georgia for reasons other than tradition, too. Alabama is probably the best team in the nation this year, so what better of an opponent for ND to prove for once and all that it is back.* Had Georgia beaten Alabama after being outplayed (which is almost what happened), then there could have been a debate about whether or not beating Georgia would necessarily prove anything. Instead, the matchup against the Tide gives ND every opportunity to silence their doubters and validate their fans. I cannot wait. January 7th is a long way away.
* Of course, in most practical definitions of the word, Notre Dame is already "back" (if they even went anywhere), but since the goal of the program seems to be winning titles, the Irish need to do so to be all the way back, in the strictest sense of the term.
One More Quick Note on Conferences
One of the assumptions that you'll see when people invoke the conference fallacy is the assumption that the SEC is far and away the best conference. Yes, there are 6 teams in the top 15 and a few other teams look feisty, so the advantage of the strength at the top is undeniable. However, I don't think it's that cut and dry. In truth, you can get very different answers to the question of "which conference is best" depending on what you think makes a conference good.
To understand this differing of opinion, let's examine a source that would disagree with the initial assumption. One such source would be famous statistician Jeff Sagarin. If you look at Sagarin's conference measures, he actually has the Big 12 a little bit above the SEC in both his simple average and central mean calculations. The reason for this is pretty clear: In those measurements he's taking the whole conference into account and when you do that, you'll find that the Big 12 is deeper than the SEC. Examining his pure points predictor, we can see that the second worst team in the Big 12 is Iowa State at 39th. The SEC has a whopping 6 teams with a lower rank than that, which is what drags them down in Sagarin's estimation. I think what we see here is a small symptom of the super-conference fad. That is, smaller conferences will have higher variance in overall quality since they have fewer members, and will have better shots at being the best conference overall (of course, they'll also have a better chance at flaming out as well). The larger conferences, on the other hand, are far more likely to have one or more terrible teams that drag the conference as a whole down in measures such as Sagarin's.
If you instead choose to weight the strength of the top teams in the conference, like many appear to do, then I could see how you could arrive at the conclusion that the SEC is the best. I could even get behind this as a reasonable framework with one caveat: You would need to make sure that you're not overrating these top teams because of their performance against a weak bottom of a conference. The top six teams in the SEC went 30-0 against the rest of the SEC, which suggests that the top teams' records may be a little inflated. That being said, both the top and the bottom of the conference have good enough non-conference resumes to justify the strength of those subdivisions*. As a result, I can understand and support either argument. The main poin from my conference fallacy post still stands though: Just because you win the best conference doesn't make you the best team. Alabama deserves to be in the title game not simply because they won the SEC, but because they demonstrated all season that they were one of the best (if not the best) teams in the nation.
*The top 6 teams passed all of their non-conference tests with flying colors, and even bottom teams like Kentucky (Kent State) and Tennessee (NC State) picked up some nice wins.
My Heisman Ballot
1. Manti Te'o
As a Notre Dame fan, I've been reading a lot of arguments about why Manti should win the Heisman. Many of them laud Manti for being a high character guy and for leading his team to a 12-0 record. These are great things and are very true, but for me the argument for Manti comes down to this:
He was really great at football this year, and there is no runaway candidate.
The first part of the sentence should be obvious to everyone. In case it isn't, remember that this happened. The second part is true a lot more often than you probably think, and is what I'm going to talk about. I think that the Heisman is as difficult to award as any major sports award, because of the nature of college football. You have amazing athletes on 124 teams playing 10 different positions and getting just 12 or 13 games to make their arguments. Given how there are often a large cluster of players that likely provide about the same amount of value to their teams, it can be impossible to narrow down the field. As a result, I have trouble getting too worked up about the Heisman. Yes, I was disappointed when Mark Ingram won (since he was the second best RB on his team), but in general this isn't like baseball where you can often point to solid quantifiable reasons for one candidate.
As for the arguments I mentioned at the beginning, let's deal with those. The character argument usually rubs me the wrong way. Yes, it seems apparent that Manti is a great guy, but a lot of your behavior at that age is determined by your background. Using this as a justification for the Heisman would seem to unfarily discriminate against those from less stable backgrounds. Plus, as much as we think we know these athletes, we really don't. The 12-0 argument is also weak. Yes, A&M lost two more games, but they were both single digit losses to top ten teams. If Pitt makes a short field goal, and A&M's defense forces one more crucial turnover against LSU, then we could be looking at two 11-1 teams. Basically, two not unlikely plays that wouldn't have involved the candidates at hand could have rendered this argument moot. Most advanced metrics show that Texas A&M is just slightly worse (or in the case of S&P+, slightly better) than Notre Dame, so it's not like we're talking about a wide gulf in team quality anyway. In the end, I choose Manti for his skill and his leadership, but with the important caveat that it's really just a guess as to who the most outstanding player of this season was.
2. Johnny Manziel
3. Jadeveon Clowney
One of the more peculiar occurances in conference realignment is that Texas A&M and South Carolina are set to become yearly cross-divisional "rivals", but unfortunately that won't start until 2014, when Jadeveon will likely be terrorizing quarterbacks for money. It's too bad because I would have loved to see Manziel try to wriggle his way away from Mr. Clowney. Perhaps they will meet in Atlanta next year at the SEC championship.
4. Jordan Lynch
5. Marqise Lee
I am also grouping these two together because at this rate with all the conference shenanigans, Northern Illinois and USC will be playing in the PAC-12 title game next year. So we will get to see these two play against each other. Sweet.*
* I really don't have strong feelings, positive or negative, about all of the conference realignment going on so I pretty much just resort to sarcasm when talking about it.
Rankings
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. Texas A&M
5. Florida
6. Ohio State
7. LSU
8. Kansas State
9. Stanford
10. Georgia
11. Oklahoma
12. South Carolina
13. Florida State
14. Clemson
15. Utah State
16. Northern Illinois
17. Oregon State
18. UCLA
19. Nebraska
20. Texas
21. Northwestern
22. Vanderbilt
23. San Jose State
24. Michigan
25. Wisconsin
Also Considered: Oklahoma State, Baylor, Boise State, USC, Kent State
Notes on the rankings:
- Here was an interesting letter in Stewart Mandel's mailbag at SI:
I remember last year there was a big push to have Oregon ranked ahead of Stanford even though the Ducks had two losses, because one came to the No. 1 team (LSU) and Oregon beat Stanford head-to-head. The argument was the Ducks shouldn't be punished for scheduling a tough team as opposed to a patsy. This year the situation is exactly reversed. Stanford has two losses, but one came out of conference to the No. 1 team (Notre Dame), and the Cardinal have the head-to-head win against Oregon. As a Cal fan, it truly pains me to ask, but shouldn't Stanford be getting the same treatment?You may notice that I have Oregon several spots above Stanford in spite of the logic in this letter. However, at the end of the 2011 regular season however, I had 10-2 Oregon #5 and 11-1 Stanford #6 for this very reason. The reason for this discrepancy is that there are a few key differences between this year and last year that the writer left out:
1. Their victories over each other were not created equally. Last year, Oregon dominated Stanford by three touchdowns. Stanford took overtime to beat Oregon this year. Both wins are undoubtedly impressive, but Oregon's 2011 win was more impressive.
2. Oregon and Stanford were of roughly the same quality last year, whereas Oregon seems to be a bit better this year. To support this, I cite the fact that Oregon has blown out every non-Stanford opponent this year, while Stanford has had a little more trouble with some of the same opponents. The prime example of this is how Oregon shut out Arizona 49-0, while Stanford had to stage a furious comeback just to force overtime against the Wildcats.
3. Mandel touches on this briefly, but Stanford's loss to 7-5 Washington is pretty weak, even though it was on the road. Oregon's second loss last year was to the far superior USC, who I had #4 at the end of that season. Advantage Oregon.
- All of the talk today is about whether or not Northern Illinois will make a BCS bowl. As I type this, it appears to be too close to call. Naturally, I have a few thoughts about this:
1. I'm a little disappointed that Utah State hasn't gotten more serious consideration from the voters. Most advanced stats have them ahead of Northern Illinois, and they dominated their schedule a bit more than the Huskies, collecting road wins over both Louisiana Tech and San Jose State. Also Northern Illinois' loss came to 4-8 Iowa, while Utah State lost by a total of 5 points in road games against Wisconsin and the underrated BYU.
2. In spite of any arguments you can make for these non-BCS teams, there shouldn't be any outrage if they don't make the top 16. This is not a great year for the non-BCS teams, as there isn't a team anywhere near as strong as the Boises and TCUs of yesteryear (largely because most of those teams are in BCS conferences now). That being said, there are so many inherent disadvantages towards the non-BCS conferences that I won't feel too bad if they "steal" a berth this year.
- In spite of a sometimes lackluster season, Wisconsin appears at the bottom of my rankings because it's impossible to watch a team that thoroughly decimate someone and not put them in my top 25. All of their losses were close ones to good teams, so the Badgers weren't too far off from being a really good team this year anyway. Because of Wisconsin's win, there's a lot of consternation around the internet about a 5-loss team making it's way into a BCS bowl, and how the system is bad as a result. It's important to remember though that the system has nothing to do with Ohio State and Penn State behaving badly and very badly, respectively. There are a lot of arguments to be made against the BCS, but I don't think this is one of them.
- Speaking of thorough domination, there's my Huskers checking in at 19. I still have no idea where to rank this team, just like I haven't had any idea all season. They've blown teams out, gotten blown out, won close games when the score is high, lost close games when the score is high, and even won a couple of defensive battles. To say that this is the most schizophrenic team in the nation would perhaps be an understatement. At least they can hang their hats on a 10 win season and a New Year's Day bowl. And that will truly be a bowl where anything can happen.
Top Games of the Year:
There is no firm criteria for this list. I just want to reward the games that entertained me the most. Things that lead to my entertainment are:
1. Teams playing to the best of their abilities. This doesn't mean you have to be objectively great (though that doesn't hurt), you just have to be doing your best. Think Pitt vs. West Virginia in 2007.
2. The stakes have to be reasonably high. Not every game on this list has to be for the national title, but you have to be playing for more than pride.
3. If either #1 or #2 don't qualify, then there has to be something truly remarkable about the game. None of the games on this year's list fall to this criterion, but that 7 OT Arkansas - Ole Miss game would.
Runners-up: ND-Oklahoma, Kansas State-Baylor, Florida State-NC State, Nebraska-Michigan State
5. Alabama 21, LSU 17 - This is actually the earliest game on the list, which shows how this season didn't really ramp up until the end. The CBS night game is often amazing (UF-LSU in 2007, LSU-Bama last year), and this game didn't fail to excite. LSU played its best game of the year, and Alabama finished the game with the best drive of the year. Unfortunately for this game (and fortunately for college football fans), it was overshadowed by later games.
4. Stanford 17, Oregon 14 - This game gets a couple of bonus points for being brilliantly scheduled alongside the KSU-Baylor game so fans of Notre Dame and the SEC could watch all the dominos fall at once. Of all the performances I've seen this year, the effort from Stanford's defense in this game has to be the best. No other team came remotely close to slowing down Oregon, and Stanford was able to put on a clinic. Oregon still did collect 400 yards, so it wasn't as if they embarassed themselves, but they did show that they are just as stoppable as everyone else.
3. Alabama 32, Georgia 28 - This may be a controversial opinion, but I didn't think this game was as great as everyone else thought. Yes, the stakes were ridiculously high, and yes, we saw a lot of great and memorable performances and plays. However, way too many poor plays and decisions dominated the game. Murray and McCarron both made some boneheaded throws against good but not great secondaries. Georgia didn'r figure out that it should maybe have more than three down lineman until it was too late. And of course, there was the final drive, in which someone should have been screaming "SPIKE THE BALL." This game still gets ranked #3 on my list, because it's probably the first truly memorable SEC title game ever, but neither team played up to their abilities.
2. Utah State 48, Louisiana Tech 41 - The death throes of the WAC turned out to be one of the best under the radar storylines of the year. Three actually good teams battled it out (SJSU being the other) to claim the WAC crown in perpetuity. This game featured an amazing rally by the Bulldogs only to see the Aggies clean up in overtime and take the conference. It didn't hurt that this game was played in one of my favorite outposts in college football, Ruston, Louisiana. Every game I watch there manages to sound both incredbly loud and incredibly small at the same time.
1. Texas A&M 29, Alabama 24 - This game had about everything you could want. Two great teams playing their "A" games. A star being born in Johnny Manziel. A defending champion (and perhaps eventual champion) getting pinned down early and fighting back hard. A tight finish with plenty of drama to go around, resulting in one of the biggest upsets of the season. I hope the title game is as good as this one was. Or it could be an ND blowout, you know. That'd be cool, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)