Saturday, January 7: Compass Bowl in Birmingham, AL at Noon eastern
Southern Methodist Mustangs (7-5) vs. Pittsburgh Panthers (6-6)
Here's another bowl game that would have been huge news in another era...about 30 years ago maybe?
Vegas line/spread: Pittsburgh by 3.5 (over/under 47)
SMU has the better record, but Pitt is favorited to win a low-scoring game. Not just low-scoring compared to recent bowl games (which doesn't say much), but lower than the average game.
| Game-comparisons | win % | vs. spread |
| SMU | 37% | 44% |
| Pittsburgh | 63% | 56% |
Pitt's game ratings are generally higher than SMU's, and this is reflected in their Strength rating of #43. SMU played a weak schedule, so despite a winning record they're below average in Strength, ranking #74. Pitt wins the majority of game-comparisons even after the spread is taken into account. Is Pitt being downgraded due to their coaching change and its after-effects? Or are there valid reasons to narrow Pitt's advantage?
Strength Power Rating: Pittsburgh 25, SMU 19 Tempo-free: Pittsburgh 27, SMU 17
In both scoring offense and defense (adjusted for opponents), Pitt is better than SMU. Their offense is #51 while SMU's is a woeful #91. Both defenses are above average; the Panthers rank #36 and the Mustangs #47. Pitt ends up with a projected 6 point advantage, and like the oddsmakers and betting public we see a low-scoring game. The game doesn't seem to lend itself to a fast "tempo" either, with the same over/under projected by the tempo-corrected estimate, with a wider Pitt win.
Yardage analysis: SMU 24, Pittsburgh 21 per attempt: SMU 24, Pittsburgh 17
Here's some evidence to temper the wider Pitt spreads we forecast above. By yardage from scrimmage, SMU is better than Pitt; they're #53 in adjusted yardage differential and Pittsburgh is only #68. SMU ranks somewhat better in both offense and defense (#77 and #52) than they do in scoring, while Pittsburgh is a lot lower on offensive yardage (#69) than offensive scoring. Their yardage defense rank (#37) is very similar.
So we have SMU looking better by yardage than points across the board, while only Pitt's yardage defense is reflected in the final scores. To explain these discrepancies we look at a number of stats that would make teams better or worse at turning yards into points. SMU's poor point production can be at least partially explained by their bad red zone performance (#100 in the nation), which kills drives after a lot of yardage has been gained. Another factor—one that explains both sides of the ball for SMU—is their #120 ranked turnover margin. Their own drives are killed by turnovers, which gives the opponent the ball in short yardage situations. As for Pitt's overperformance in points from their low-yardage offense, they rank #5 in red zone scoring, meaning they don't waste opportunities and don't have as much "meaningless" yardage.
In any case, in pure yards from scrimmage, SMU is better and would win a game if yardage converted to points equally; they should outgain Pitt by around 25 total yards. In a per-play comparison the spread is even wider; SMU has a small advantage in yards per carry, and a larger one in yards per attempt when passing.
Yardage + interceptions + kick returns: Pittsburgh 24, SMU 22
Because there's rarely such a thing as perfect conversion of yards to points—and teams that win the yardage battle can easily lose the game—we attempt to adjust the yardage estimate with other forces, namely return yards and turnovers. In both areas, Pitt has the clear advantage.
For return yards, we give Pitt about 1 point, mainly because their kick and punt coverage is so good (#10 in both in the nation). SMU has a poor kickoff return average, and Pitt has returned 2 kicks for touchdowns to SMU's one.
For turnovers, we look just at interceptions which are more consistent across time than fumbles which tend to be very random. But it turns out in either category, Pitt has a big advantage because as we mentioned, SMU is last in the nation in raw turnover margin and still only #118 when adjusted for who they've played. We give Pitt another 4 points, resulting in a new estimate that has the Panthers on top. It's also a lot closer to the Vegas line than the Strength projection.
When SMU has the ball
| SMU rushing offense: #93 |
Pittsburgh rushing defense: #47 |
Zach Line was SMU's sole rushing weapon most of the season, and he was getting better each game before he was lost for the year, needing toe surgery. He had 1,224 yards and 17 touchdowns, averaging nearly 6 yards per carry. With Line out, SMU turned to Rishaad Wimbley and Jared Williams, who couldn't do a thing against Houston but ran wild on Rice, whatever that tells us. Pitt's rushing defense isn't great but it's enough to handle the Mustangs' low volume effort; without Line there we don't see SMU reaching 100 yards.
| SMU passing offense: #37 | Pittsburgh passing defense: #69 per att: #60 |
| SMU interceptions thrown ranking: #118 | Pittsburgh interceptions picked ranking: #69 |
| SMU quarterback protection rank: #79 | Pittsburgh pass rush rank: #8 |
After Kyle Padron followed up a promising 2009 with a breakthrough 2010, SMU seemed set at quarterback for a few more years. But Padron faltered and was replaced by J.J. McDermott who went on to rack up 3,182 yards, about the same per-game as Padron had last year. His completion rate was the same, too, but his TD:int ratio was 16:16 while Padron had 31:14 last year. Whatever the case, he's the starter and for a while it looked like it was a good move, as SMU was on an offensive roll. But McDermott had 9 interceptions in SMU's 4 late losses. Now healthier, and with two nearly-1,000 yard receivers in Darius Johnson and Cole Beasley, McDermott should throw for about 260 yards against Pitt's just-average pass defense.
Since McDermott has been very interception-prone late in the season, look for Pitt to get one, maybe two, even though their defense hasn't had a lot of picks (just 8) this season. The bigger problem for the Mustangs could be protecting McDermott; SMU has given up 27 sacks this year while Pitt has one of the top pass rushes in the country, with 39 this season. Lineman Aaron Donald and linebacker Brandon Lindsey have 18.5 between them. Pitt should have at least 3 sacks in an average game.
When Pittsburgh has the ball
| Pittsburgh rushing offense: #35 |
SMU rushing defense: #26 |
Ray Graham didn't quite reach 1,000 yards this season before a season-ending injury against UConn. Zach Brown and Issac Bennett filled in, combining for over 500 yards but neither approached Graham's per-carry average of 5.8. SMU has a good rushing defense and should hold Pitt below 140 yards on the ground.
| Pittsburgh passing offense: #87 | SMU passing defense: #65 per att: #37 |
| Pittsburgh interceptions thrown ranking: #62 | SMU interceptions picked ranking: #108 |
| Pittsburgh quarterback protection rank: #120 | SMU pass rush rank: #28 |
Tino Sunseri was supposed to thrive under Todd Graham's passing offense, but instead he struggled to match last year's figures, finishing under 2,500 yards with 10 TDs and 10 interceptions. Devin Street and Mike Shanahan combined for over 1,100 receiving yards. SMU has a fairly good pass defense on a per-attempt basis, so it depends on how well Pitt can run against the Mustangs. Normally I'd expect upwards of 200 yards of passing offense. Apparently Graham was very hard on Sunseri so he might actually do better with him gone.
Pitt doesn't have to worry too much about interceptions, because it's not something SMU really does (they have 5 this year, against fairly interception-prone passers), but I'd give the Mustangs a 50/50 shot at getting one. What SMU will have is a lot of sacks; they have 26 on the year, and Sunseri has been sacked an astounding 54 times this year, including 10 vs. West Virginia. We estimate they'll drop him 5 times during the game, though it could be worse if offensive lineman Lucas Nix doesn't play.
|
|
SMU's season (7-5)
Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (1)
Wins vs. top 25 teams (1)
Losses (5) to losing teams (1)
- @ Texas A&M 14-46
- UTEP 28-17
- Northwestern St 40-7
- @ Memphis 42-0
- @ #12 TCU 40-33 OT
- Central Florida 38-17
- @ #20 Southern Miss 3-27
- @ Tulsa 7-38
- Tulane 45-24
- Navy 17-24
- @ #14 Houston 7-37
- Rice 27-24
Though SMU played a light schedule overall, it was one of contrasts: lots of very easy teams, and a handful of very good ones. They faced top 25 teams TCU, Southern Miss, and Houston, as well as high-Strength Texas A&M and bowl-bound Tulsa. Out of that bunch they only beat TCU, but that gives them something Pitt doesn't have—a win over a top 25 team.
They also had a loss to a losing team (Navy), something else Pitt didn't have. And the inclusion of UTEP, Northwestern State, Memphis, Tulane, and Rice offset the strong part of their schedule. In the end, their aggregate schedule had a stronger-than-average offense, but much weaker than average defense.
The obvious thing in SMU's chart is how their performance fell off a cliff, making their graph look like a disappointing stock market pick. Bought at 30, doubled in just four weeks, then plunged back down to 30 and stayed there. The three-game stretch featuring a Memphis shutout, the win over TCU, and beating up UCF showed a team headed for a great season. But SMU's four later-season losses featured horrible offensive play: 3 points against Southern Miss, 7 against Tulsa, 17 vs. Navy, and 7 on Houston. That's 8.5 points a game, for a team that averaged 40 points over a 4-game stretch earlier.
Pittsburgh's season (6-6)
Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (1)
Wins vs. top 25 teams (0)
Losses (6) to losing teams (0)
- Buffalo 35-16
- Maine 35-29
- @ Iowa 27-31
- Notre Dame 12-15
- South Florida 44-17
- @ Rutgers 10-34
- Utah 14-26
- Connecticut 35-20
- Cincinnati 23-26
- @ Louisville 21-14
- @ West Virginia 20-21
- Syracuse 33-20
Just like every year, Pitt was supposed to be improved, but wasn't. Even a coaching change could reverse the mediocrity, and it started right from the beginning.
An unconvincing win over Buffalo was followed by an even shakier win over Maine. Then they led by 17 points in the fourth quarter before losing to Iowa, 31-27. A loss to Notre Dame put them at 2-2.
It seemed that things might turn around as they beat South Florida 44-17, but bad losses to Rutgers and Utah put the kabosh on that. Their up-and-down season ended appropriately with alternating wins and losses and a 6-6 result. The offense was consistently mediocre but the defense improved throughout the second part of the season, and they held all six of their last opponents to 26 or fewer points.
Key Injuries
SMU should be healthy for the game; starting quarterback McDermott's injuries are healed, but if he is reinjured, backup Kyle Padron is probably unavailable. Pitt may be without Lucas Nix after he was involved in an incident recently, which hurts their already-crippled offensive line and its porous quarterback protection.
Psychology/Motivation
- SMU's season: +0 wins; Pittsburgh's season: -1 win
- SMU's momentum: -2 wins; Pittsburgh's momentum: +0 wins
- SMU won final game: yes; Pittsburgh won final game: yes
- SMU glad to be there? no; Pittsburgh glad to be there: no
- SMU coaching situation: awkward; Pittsburgh coaching situation: FUBARed
Last year Pitt was a disappointing 7-5, and with a new coach they were a disappointing 6-6. SMU had the same record as last year. But was SMU's season better than Pitt's? Last year the Mustangs made the C-USA title game, but not this year. And disappointment has been an annual even for the Panthers.
Also, SMU was trucking along, looking like the team to beat in the C-USA after starting 5-1 with an upset win over TCU. But they went 2-4 down the stretch. Pitt's season was a disappointment early that they've at least had time to get used to. Their coaching situation is more depressing than their 6-6 year.
After Todd Graham left, many players were pissed off, and most probably still are. But this late bowl game might help them get over it. And SMU has to deal with their coach trying to leave—for the very same job. In short, neither team should be in very good spirits for the game, and the one that manages that feat has a big advantage.
We could see SMU being a lot more ready to play. Beating a Big East team might mean something, whereas Pitt has little reason to think that beating SMU will end their season on a high note.
|
|
Final analysis
Out data analyses came to all three possible conclusions: Pitt wins and beats the spread, Pitt wins but SMU beats the spread, and SMU wins. As usual, the results cluster around the Vegas line because Vegas uses a lot of these kinds of things when determining the line (it's no longer just a bunch of guys in a smoke-filled back-room). Other factors come into play, like estimates of team psychology, but those are pretty hit and miss.
For example, this game features two very unique coaching debacles that are strangely intermingled. Pitt's head coach, Todd Graham, bolted for the Arizona State job...a job that had been promised to current SMU coach June Jones before that offer was rescinded. So we have a team whose coach was supposed to get the ASU job, but ASU decided they wanted Pitt's coach instead. Whose team is more disturbed, the team whose coach who wanted to leave but couldn't, or the team whose coach abandoned them after just one season? Hard to say; Pitt's situation seems like the worse of the two, but there are other questions about the Mustangs.
Such as, what happened to SMU's offense late in the year? Well, the teams were tougher. But they scored 33 on TCU in regulation, and the charts are corrected for the opponents' defenses. Leading rusher Zach Line was lost for the season, but he was around until the last two games and putting up as many yards as ever through the Navy game. QB McDermott had injury issues starting in late September (starting with the TCU game) and chipped a bone in his foot in the Tulsa game, and that's part of the problem for sure. But it doesn't explain all of what we see in their stats, which is a team that has underperformed on offense 5 of its last 6 games. McDermott should be healthy which helps, but Line isn't back.
It probably won't be a pretty game, nor very high-scoring. Both teams lost their key running back late in the season. Both teams will suffer a lot of quarterback sacks. It will put an end to a couple of disappointing seasons. SMU could be more motivated in this game, and that could carry them to a win. But we can't be sure of that; instead, it's hard to ignore the trends that Pitt's defense is getting better while SMU's offense looks stuck in a rut.
Prediction: Pittsburgh 16, SMU 14
More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2011-2012 bowl game schedule.
|
|
Comments