SportsRatings: College Football

2013-2014 BCS Championship Game Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Florida State (13-0) vs. Auburn (12-1)

Monday, January 6: BCS title game in Pasadena, CA at 8:30 pm EST

#1 Florida State Seminoles (13-0) vs. #2 Auburn Tigers (12-1)

The undefeated Seminoles face SEC champ Auburn for all the BCS marbles.

Vegas line/spread: Florida State by 9 (over/under 65)

Florida State is a pretty big favorite with the oddsmakers. The line has ranged from 7 1/2 to 9 points, with 8 1/2 and 9 the most common spots currently. A high-scoring game is expected but the over/under has dropped a couple of points to 65.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Florida State	87%	74%
Auburn	13%	26%

To the Strength power rating, there is no question: FSU is a huge favorite, and they win 7 of 8 game comparisons and about 3/4 against the spread. The Seminoles are far and away #1 in the power rating, and despite their success Auburn is only #11 in the nation in average game performance.

Strength power rating:   Florida State 47, Auburn 27     by Median rating:  FSU 47-27
Florida State scoring offense: #2 vs. Auburn scoring defense: #29
Florida State scoring defense: #4 vs. Auburn scoring offense: #7

Our power rating predicts a blowout, pretty much, yielding a 20-point spread. FSU's offense rates beyond only Baylor, and their defense follows behind Stanford, Alabama, and Michigan State. That combination of top 5 offense and defense is rarely seen, even in a #1 team, and puts them in company with national champs such as 1999 FSU, 2001 Miami, 2004 USC, and 2005 Texas—and right now, this year's team outrates them all. Auburn has a top ten offense but their defense lags; they've made up the difference in luck.

Yardage analysis:   Florida State 43, Auburn 27     per-play:   Florida State 49, Auburn 34
Yardage differential: Florida State #3 vs. Auburn #20
Florida State total offense: #8 vs. Auburn total defense: #61
Florida State total defense: #6 vs. Auburn total offense: #12

By yardage only it's a bit closer. Florida State is #3 in adjusted yardage differential but Auburn is just #20. The Seminoles are still top ten in both offense and defense and Auburn is close, but the Tigers are #61 on defense—in other words, they give up a hell of a lot of yards. It's to their credit that this yardage isn't converted into points for the other team at a very high rate.

In any case, this projection shows Florida State gaining well over 500 yards of total offense and Auburn gaining around 400. That coverts to about a 16 point spread. Using per-play figures, FSU could average 10 yards per pass play while the rushing averages for the teams are nearly even (around 5). This results in an even higher-scoring game with around the same margin. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Florida State 45, Auburn 30

• Interceptions: Auburn may have the edge here despite FSU's takeaway defense—mostly because the Tigers don't pass much. It's worth about a point.
• Forced fumbles: The Tigers don't force many fumbles and cough up the ball more since they run a lot. FSU gets almost 3 points here.
• Sacks: Auburn will probably win the sacks battle, on averege this is a near-2-point edge.
• Red zone%: Auburn's red zone play is pretty fantastic, with the #6 offense and #9 defense. FSU has the #3 offense so they don't lose any points, but Auburn gains about 3 points.
• 3rd-down%: FSU is #7 in both adjusted 3rd down offense and defense. Auburn is solid, too, ranking #20 and #11, but we still see a swing toward the Seminoles of around 2 points.
• Special Teams: Auburn is #29 and Florida State #42 in special teams by ESPN's advanced stats, an edge of about 1/2 point.

Summary: After all that, the yardage-estimate spread narrows by just 1 point.

When Florida State has the ball

Florida State rushing offense: #30

Auburn rushing defense: #44

Devonta Freeman leads the team with 943 yards; Karlos Williams is #2 with 705, and James Wilder, Jr is 3rd with 542. They have 32 touchdowns between them. Auburn has faced some good rushing teams this year and done pretty well, so the Seminoles should have around 185 yards.

Florida State passing offense: #13	Auburn passing defense: #86   per att: #50
Florida State interceptions thrown ranking: #69	Auburn interceptions picked ranking: #61
Florida State quarterback protection rank: #72	Auburn pass rush rank: #37

Heisman trophy winner Jameis Winston passed for 3,820 yards with 38 touchdowns and 10 interceptions as a redshirt freshman. Three receivers are this close to 1,000 yards: Rashad Greene, Kelvin Benjamin, and Kenny Shaw need 19, 43, and 71 respectively to hit the mark. They have 29 TDs between them. Auburn's pass defense isn't very good, so Winston could have around 340 yards.

Winston isn't terribly interception prone and Auburn has just 13 on the year, so their better bet is to try to pressure him. Auburn's Dee Ford came through big to sack Johnny Manziel to win the Texas A&M game, and he has 8.5 sacks on the year. Winston has been sacked 23 times; the team's #72 rating is skewed lower by Jacob Coker's 5 sacks vs. 36 pass attempts.

When Auburn has the ball

Auburn rushing offense: #1

Florida State rushing defense: #12

Tre Mason became a sudden sensation for his work vs. Alabama and particularly his 300 yards vs. Missouri. Mason finished with 1,621 rushing yards while QB Nick Marshall topped 1,000 himself. Two others, Corey Grant and Cameron Artis-Payne, topped 600 apiece, making Auburn the #1 opponent-adjusted rushing team in the country. FSU's rushing defense is good but it will be tested, big time. The Seminoles' closest game was against Boston College when Andre Williams rushed for 149 yards and the team for 200. We see Auburn rushing for about 290 in the bowl game.

Auburn passing offense: #104	Florida State passing defense: #3   per att: #1
Auburn interceptions thrown ranking: #5	Florida State interceptions picked ranking: #1
Auburn quarterback protection rank: #29	Florida State pass rush rank: #44

Nick Marshall has 1,759 passing yards and Jeremy Johnson adds 422. Together they have 18 touchdown passes and 7 interceptions. Sammie Coates is the only receiver of note with 841 yards and 7 TDs. Florida State's #3 pass defense (#1 per-attempt) is almost wasted here. We see Auburn topping 100 yards but not by very much.

Florida State has the country's best takeaway pass defense, with 25 interceptions. Interestingly, no player has more than 4 picks and only 6 have 2 or more. 16 players have recorded an interception; they're everywhere on the field. It's a good thing for Auburn they're not a pass-heavy team.

Marshall has been sacked 16 times; Florida State's pass rush is nothing like it was last year and again, it's the running game that Auburn will be using for the most part.

 

Florida State's season (13-0)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (7)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (2)
Losses (0) to losing teams (0)

1. @ Pittsburgh  W 41-13
   
2. Nevada  W 62- 7
   
3. Bethune-Cookman  W 54- 6
   
4. @ Boston College  W 48-34
   
5. Maryland  W 63- 0
   
6. @ #12 Clemson  W 51-14
   
7. North Carolina St  W 49-17
   
8. Miami FL  W 41-14
   
9. @ Wake Forest  W 59- 3
   
10. Syracuse  W 59- 3
    
11. Idaho  W 80-14
    
12. @ Florida  W 37- 7
    
13. @ #24 Duke  W 45- 7

Florida State's early games could have been misleading, as the competition level was pretty low as they won 41-13, 62-7, and 54-6. When they only beat Boston College by 14, it seemed clear that tougher teams would give them trouble, and 4-0 Maryland might be their first really tight game.

Instead, the Seminoles mauled the Terrapins 63-0. Surely, though, a strong and confident Clemson would challenge them this year in South Carolina? Nope, FSU won on the road, 51-14. That game was a classic "tell" that a team might be the best in the nation. Instead people downgraded Clemson as not the real deal. FSU beat Miami 41-14 but now everyone says that game means nothing. What does it take?

Maybe beating two conference foes each 59-3, back to back? Well, that's just Wake Forest and Syracuse. So any team could do it? I guess so.

Florida was terrible this year, and Duke, well that's a basketball school. You can excuse any and all of FSU's big wins. But the Seminoles faced two BCS top 25 teams and beat them by a combined score of 96-21; that doesn't happen too often.

Auburn's season (12-1)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (9)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (4)
Losses (1) to losing teams (0)

1. Washington St  W 31-24
   
2. Arkansas St  W 38- 9
   
3. Mississippi St  W 24-20
   
4. @ #16 LSU  L 21-35
   
5. Mississippi  W 30-22
   
6. Western Carolina  W 62- 3
   
7. @ #21 Texas A&M  W 45-41
   
8. Florida Atlantic  W 45-10
   
9. @ Arkansas  W 35-17
   
10. @ Tennessee  W 55-23
    
11. #22 Georgia  W 43-38
    
12. #3 Alabama  W 34-28
    
13. = #8 Missouri  W 59-42

Through four games Auburn was a pretty average team, and at 3-1 a bowl game wasn't guaranteed. They'd beaten Washington State by a touchdown and Mississippi State by four points. And lost to LSU 35-14.

But they started to get better on offense, slowly but surely, as Gus Malzahn's system clicked and Nick Marshall figured some things out. They scored 30 on Ole Miss, and 62 against Western Carolina. The key game was #7, when they managed to keep up with Johnny Football and win it in the end. They scored 45 the next week too vs. FAU.

By this time the offense was one of the nation's best and after beating Arkansas and Tennessee they took a huge lead on Georgia, only to see it evaporate. But they had a crazy, lucky play in their back pocket and won the game on the Immaculate Deflection. Facing Alabama, they matched them stride for stride and again were in position for a lucky play to win the game. Missouri was yet another shootout but they had a lot more ammo in the end.

The team's offensive chart slopes up not unlike the 2010 Auburn team with Cam Newton. Malzahn was offensive coordinator that year and Marshall and Tre Mason are following the same growth pattern that Newton had. The defense is no worse than it was in 2010. What they don't have is a passing game like Newton provided, but you can't have it all.

Key Injuries

Auburn has just one questionable starter on defense. FSU is also in pretty good shape overall.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Florida State's season: +2 wins; Auburn's season: +9 wins
• Florida State's momentum: +0 wins; Auburn's momentum: +1 win
• Florida State won final game: YES; Auburn won final game: YES
• Florida State glad to be there? yes; Auburn glad to be there: yes
• Florida State time zones from home: 3; Auburn time zones from home: 2;
• Florida State coaching situation: stable; Auburn coaching situation: stable

There is rarely much to talk about here when it's the national championship game, since any question of teams "wanting to be there" is moot. Teams generally won their last games and had a great season if they're here. The main thing to address psychologically is overconfidence on the favorite's part, but that's probably not an issue here.

There is a big difference on how these teams got here from last year. Florida State had an excellent season and won a BCS bowl last year. Auburn, however, was 3-9 last year. They have 8 or 9 more wins depending on whether you count the SEC title game as part of the regular season.

Auburn also might have some of the "team of destiny" feeling that a team can get when they seem to be riding a combination of great play and fortuitousness. Ohio State in 2002 was probably the last "team of destiny" that made it to the national championship due to lots of luck and then went on to win in an upset. It doesn't always work out, though—Notre Dame was certainly a very lucky team last year and probably thought nothing could stop them into they ran into a wall vs. Alabama.

Final analysis

Here's the scenario: an undefeated, traditional football power, ranked #1 in the polls, boasting the landslide winner for the Heisman Trophy at quarterback is playing for the BCS championship. This team has blown away almost every team they've faced, and is more than a touchdown favorite to win the game, and ranks #1 in our power rating.

Their opponents are the SEC champs who have suffered 1 conference loss (in a road game) and needed some luck and for some other teams to lose to get the chance they now have. They are only #11 in our power rating.

The teams? Ohio State and Florida, circa 2006. The result? Florida 41, Ohio State 14

Anything can happen in college football, and the example above proves it. Some people have been comparing Auburn with 2002 Ohio State because of the luck they've needed in close games, but the situation is a lot closer to Florida-Ohio State 2006.

Is today's situation with Florida State and Auburn just history ready to repeat itself? What's different about today's scenario?

For one thing, Florida State was not the year's crowned champion like Ohio State was in 2006. Those Buckeyes started #1 and finished the regular season #1, and over time felt that they were invincible. They certainly went into the championship game way overconfident. Florida State only became #1 a few weeks ago and they're hungrier. 2006 Ohio State was four years out from their last national title; FSU is going on 14 years.

Florida State is not getting the credit they deserve for what they've done. In 2006 Ohio State was called one of the best teams of all time even though they edged Michigan 42-39 and barely beat 2-10 Illinois 17-10. It seemed that once they beat Texas on the road, 24-7, there was nothing more they had to do to earn respect. FSU on the other hand can beat BCS bowl teams by 37 points on the road and it's discounted because that team had a 2nd loss. While Auburn is getting all the attention for their crazy wins—which is completely deserved—no one's paying attention to the other remarkable fact: that this year's Florida State is playing like of the best college football teams of all time.

This year no one's treating the title game as a foregone conclusion, and that's a big difference. Any team that can beat Alabama has to be reckoned with. Much of the public seems surprised that FSU is favored by so much, or that they're favored at all. Florida State still has something to prove, which Ohio State didn't have in 2006. Many people would be more surprised by a big FSU win than they would by an Auburn victory.

Our Strength power rating would have had Ohio State a 10 point favorite in 2006; Florida State is closer to a 20-point favorite today. So this would be an upset an order of magnitude greater. Yet I personally gave Florida no chance back then, but realize Auburn could beat the Seminoles on January 6th. Part of that is the precedent that Florida set by beating Ohio State; the rest is just the "feeling" that this game is in contention, a feeling I didn't have back then.

But when big upsets happen, there's usually a psychological reason—normally overconfidence on the part of the favorite (see 1983 Nebraska, facing an unheralded 1-loss Miami team). Florida State doesn't seem to be a good candidate for that.

If Auburn wins it will be because they were good enough to beat the Seminoles, not because they caught them getting careless. The Tigers have improved dramatically from the beginning of the season. During the first four games they were just an above-average team. So it's unfair to them to grade their quality using every game of the season; just the last five or six are probably representative. Yet despite this improvement, they never quite reached the level that FSU played at all year long on average. The 2010 Auburn team had a similar trajectory and by the time of the bowl game, they'd improved even more, enough to beat juggernaut Oregon.

The 2010 Auburn win wasn't an upset by the oddsmakers. This one would be. And let's face it, as good as he is Nick Marshall is no Cam Newton. With Marshall and Tre Mason this will easily be the strongest rushing team the Seminoles have faced, and that will test their defense like no other team has.

But Florida State is good enough to deal with the Tigers. And without the almost-necessary condition of overconfidence, we have to think that a motivated Florida State team will prove they're the best in the country by beating Auburn handily.

Prediction:  Florida State 45, Auburn 34

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Godaddy.com Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Ball State (10-2) vs. Arkansas State (7-5)

Sunday, January 5: GoDaddy.com Bowl in Mobile, AL at 9:00 pm EST

Ball State Cardinals (10-2) vs. Arkansas State Red Wolves (7-5)

By the end of the GoDaddy.com Bowl, one of these teams will have its first win over a bowl-eligible team that wasn't snubbed come selection time.

Vegas line/spread: Ball State by 8 1/2 (over/under 63.5)

The Cardinals are a sizable favorite, and scoring is expected to be fairly high.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Ball State	73%	52%
Arkansas St	27%	48%

Ball State wins nearly 3/4 of the game comparisons, but just over 1/2 with the spread take into account. The Cardinals are only #65 in the Strength power rating, but Arkansas State is #105.

Strength power rating:   Ball State 38, Arkansas St 28     by Median rating:  Ball State 37-28
Ball State scoring offense: #31 vs. Arkansas St scoring defense: #97
Ball State scoring defense: #111 vs. Arkansas St scoring offense: #113

The Strength power rating projects Ball State as about a 10-point winner. Ball State's offense is almost top 25 in quality and the Red Wolves defense isn't a good match. When Arkansas State has the ball things are pretty even—both teams rank 111 or above. Those rankings are from the All-Division power rating, so all teams are included. Among just FBS schools Arkansas State's offense is #94 and Ball State's defense is #87.

Yardage analysis:   Ball State 42, Arkansas St 31     per-play:   Ball State 40, Arkansas St 30
Yardage differential: Ball State #82 vs. Arkansas St #106
Ball State total offense: #35 vs. Arkansas St total defense: #103
Ball State total defense: #113 vs. Arkansas St total offense: #96

It's roughly the same story when comparing yardage components. This projection calls for Ball State to top 500 yards of total offense while outgaining the Red Wolves by about 80 yards. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Ball State 43, Arkansas St 33

• Interceptions: Interception totals would suggest an edge for Ball State, but using total pass defenses (picks + breakups) gives better predictive value. Here, Arkansas State gets a big boost, as they should have an extra interception on average. We add nearly 4 points.
• Forced fumbles: This one goes the other way, to Ball State, by around 1 1/2 points.
• Sacks: Ball State should have a big edge here, as Arkansas State ranks #114 in sacks by the defense and #104 on QB protections. It should be around 3-0 for Ball State, and we give them 6 points.
• Red zone%: Arkansas State's very good red zone offense gives them a boost here, of around 3 points.
• 3rd-down%: The Red Wolves should have better-than-average success on third down while the Cardinals have a lower rate. We add over a point to Arkansas State and dock Ball State almost as much.
• Special Teams: Ball State has the #21 special teams but Arkansas State is #10, excelling on field goals and punt returns. That gives about 1/2 point to the Wolves.

Summary: There was a lot of back and forth but in the end, the teams finished where they were in the Strength power rating, with Ball State by 10 points.

When Ball State has the ball

Ball State rushing offense: #97

Arkansas St rushing defense: #97

Jahwan Edwards leads the team with 964 yards, while #2 rusher Horactio Banks (595 yards) is out for the year with an ACL tear. The Arkansas State rushing defense is just as bad as Ball State's rushing offense; look for not much over 150 yards.

Ball State passing offense: #12	Arkansas St passing defense: #98   per att: #80
Ball State interceptions thrown ranking: #27	Arkansas St interceptions picked ranking: #92
Ball State quarterback protection rank: #11	Arkansas St pass rush rank: #114

Ball State is a passing team, and Keith Wenning is their star. He is close to 4,000 yards for the year with 34 TDs and just 6 interceptions. Willie Snead has over 1,400 yards and 14 touchdowns, Jordan Williams tops 1,000 with 10 TDs, and Jamill Smith adds 855 and 8. Arkansas State's piss-poor pass defense will probably give up around 350 yards.

Based on the interception rankins and just 6 picks Wenning has nothing to worry about against the Red Wolves, but they have so many pass breakups that it implies they're due to get more interceptions. We'll see. But the Cardinals definitely have little concern with the Wolves' pass rush, which has an average 24 sacks but againt very sack-prone teams. Wenning has been sacked just 11 times.

When Arkansas State has the ball

Arkansas St rushing offense: #59

Ball State rushing defense: #98

Michael Gordon is #3 in attempts but leads the team with 717 yards; QB Adam Kennedy is #2 with 514 and David Oku has 511 this year so far. The Red Wolves should have over 200 yards against the Cardinals on the ground.

Arkansas St passing offense: #101	Ball State passing defense: #112   per att: #92
Arkansas St interceptions thrown ranking: #28	Ball State interceptions picked ranking: #65
Arkansas St quarterback protection rank: #104	Ball State pass rush rank: #33

Adam Kennedy has completed 70% of his attempts for 2,337 yards and 11 touchdowns vs. 6 interceptions. Julian Jones and JD McKissic combine for almost 1,200 yards and 8 TDs receiving. Production isn't huge, but against Ball State's pass defense they could have around 225 yards.

Sacks are the biggest potential problem for the Red Wolves as Kennedy has been saked 27 times and Ball State gets pretty good pressure. Jonathan Newsome leads the Cardinal D with 8 sacks.

 

Ball State's season (10-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (2)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (2) to losing teams (0)

1. Illinois St  W 51-28
   
2. Army  W 40-14
   
3. @ North Texas  L 27-34
   
4. @ Eastern Michigan  W 51-20
   
5. Toledo  W 31-24
   
6. @ Virginia  W 48-27
   
7. Kent St  W 27-24
   
8. @ Western Michigan  W 38-17
   
9. @ Akron  W 42-24
   
10. Central Michigan  W 44-24
    
11. @ #23 Northern Illinois  L 27-48
    
12. Miami OH  W 55-14

Ball State's secret to having a 10-win season? Have an easy schedule. Also, you have to be consistent so that you aren't upset along the way.

The Cardinals outclassed Illinois State and Army to the tune of 90-42 but lost at North Texas 34-27. After that they went on a 7-game winning streak where they beat Virginia on the road, 48-27, bowl-snubs Toledo (31-24) and Central Michigan (44-24), and four other MAC teams that didn't qualify. The streak ended at Northern Illinois 48-27, but the Cardinals spanked hapless (and winless) Miami of Ohio 55-14 to finish with 10 wins.

Arkansas State's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (5) to losing teams (1)

1. Ark.-Pine Bluff  W 62-11
   
2. @ #2 Auburn  L 9-38
   
3. Troy  W 41-34
   
4. @ Memphis  L 7-31
   
5. @ #8 Missouri  L 19-41
   
6. Idaho  W 48-24
   
7. Louisiana-Lafayette  L 7-23
   
8. @ South Alabama  W 17-16
   
9. @ Louisiana-Monroe  W 42-14
   
10. Texas St  W 38-21
    
11. Georgia St  W 35-33
    
12. @ Western Kentucky  L 31-34

Arkansas State beat four bowl-eligible teams in 2013—one more than Ball State did—but none of the four was selected for a bowl game. The Red Wolves beat Troy 41-34, South Alabama 17-16, ULM 42-14, and Texas State 38-21. All four teams finished 6-6 but none are going bowling this season.

Of the 5 teams they lost to, four are eligible and three are going bowling. Of course #2 Auburn and #8 Missouri both are in major bowls; ULL is in the New Orleans bowl; Western Kentucky was 8-4 but unselected; and Memphis finished 3-9.

Arkansas State's season started poorly at 3-4, but four straight wins—three of the bowl-eligible teams and winless Georgia State—put the Wolves in the postseason again.

Key Injuries

Arkansas State QB Adam Kennedy is questionable for the game but we assume that means he'll play. Ball State's #2 rusher (Grant) is out for the season and hasn't played for several games.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Ball State's season: +1 win; Arkansas St's season: -2 wins
• Ball State's momentum: +0 wins; Arkansas St's momentum: +1 win
• Ball State won final game: YES; Arkansas St won final game: NO
• Ball State glad to be there? yes; Arkansas St glad to be there: yes
• Ball State time zones from home: 1; Arkansas St time zones from home: 0;
• Ball State coaching situation: stable; Arkansas St coaching situation: coach left

Though Arkansas State went 9-3 last year and 7-5 this year, they ended up in the same bowl for the 3rd straight year—and after seeing five of their fellow Sun Belt teams qualify but get snubbed, they're probably thankful for what they got. Ball State added a win and got an upgrade to a faux-January bowl.

The Cardinals rebounded well from their loss to Northern Illinois and beat Miami of Ohio convincingly; Arkansas State struggled against Georgia State and fell to Western Kentucky in their last two games. Further, coach Brian Harsin bolted for the Boise State job, making him their third one-and-done head coach. After Huge Freeze left two years ago the Red Wolves lost 38-20 to Northern Illinois, and after Gus Malzahn left they beat Kent State 17-13. The school just hired Blake Anderson (OC North Carolina) as the new head coach and the interim coach for the bowl will be defensive coordinator John Thompson.

Final analysis

Neither of these teams is very good, and they owe most of their success to their easy schedules. Between the two, these teams defeated just six bowl-qualifiers—and none of those is actually playing in a bowl game this postseason.

But a good comparison is how they played against the very worst teams in the nation, late in the season. Ball State hosted 0-12 Miami of Ohio and won, 55-14. Arkansas State took on 0-12 Georgia State and won 35-33.

Arkansas State has a few more problems: their quarterback is questionable for the game and their coach left. But we're assuming Kennedy will play, and this is the third GoDaddy.com Bowl in a row for the Red Wolves without their coach. They're used to it.

The bottom line that keeps coming up is that both teams have bad defenses, and only one team can claim to have a pretty good offense. Ball State is also pretty consistent in beating inferior teams, a group that includes the Red Wolves.

Prediction:  Ball State 42, Arkansas St 28

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Compass Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Houston (8-4) vs. Vanderbilt (8-4)

Saturday, January 4: Compass Bowl in Birmingham, AL at 1:00 pm EST

Houston Cougars (8-4) vs. Vanderbilt Commodores (8-4)

As far as the lower-tier January bowls go, a game between 8-4 teams is not as bad as we've seen in the past.

Vegas line/spread: Vanderbilt by 2 1/2 (over/under 54)

The Commodores are almost a field goal favorite early on.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Houston	60%	64%
Vanderbilt	40%	36%

The Strength power rating disagrees with the oddsmakers, putting Houston #42 and Vandy #62. About 3/5 of the game comparisons go Houston's way, and when the spread—favoring Vandy—is factored in it's even higher.

Strength power rating:   Houston 31, Vanderbilt 25     by Median rating:  Houston 30-26
Houston scoring offense: #38 vs. Vanderbilt scoring defense: #59
Houston scoring defense: #45 vs. Vanderbilt scoring offense: #62

The way the Strength power rating sees is, Houston has an above-average scoring offense and scoring defense, while Vanderbilt is average on both counts, leading to a 6-point margin for the Cougars.

Yardage analysis:   Vanderbilt 27, Houston 24     per-play:   Vanderbilt 24, Houston 20
Yardage differential: Houston #72 vs. Vanderbilt #61
Houston total offense: #57 vs. Vanderbilt total defense: #32
Houston total defense: #78 vs. Vanderbilt total offense: #88

By yardage, Vanderbilt rates higher, especially on defense. The Commodores are expected to have almost 400 yards of total offense, about 25 more than the Cougars. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Houston 27, Vanderbilt 20

• Interceptions: Both defenses get a lot of picks, and Vanderbilt is more interception-prone than Houston—but if you look at total pass defenses (picks + breakups), Vanderbilt has the edge. There might be several interceptions during the game and Vandy has a projected 2 point advantage.
• Forced fumbles: Houston gains back a point here.
• Sacks: Both teams may have an above-average number of sacks, with Houston having a nearly 2-point edge.
• Red zone%: Vanderbilt has the #118 adjusted red zone defense, and that could help Houston a lot. This looks like about a 4 point swing, most of it added to Houston's projected total.
• 3rd-down%: Houston ranks better than Vandy on 3rd down offense and defense, about a 3 1/2 point swing toward Houston.
• Special Teams: The Cougars have the #5 special teams in the country according to ESPN's advanced stats, while Vandy is #31, another 2-point swing for Houston.

Summary: The Cougars turn a field goal deficit into a one-touchdown edge due to red zone and 3rd down play, with potential sacks and special teams also big factors.

When Houston has the ball

Houston rushing offense: #92

Vanderbilt rushing defense: #43

Houston isn't a running team and it shows, as they rank only #92 in adjusted yardage. Ryan Jackson is the team's top rusher with 655 yards. Vandy has a decent but not great rushing defense and should hold Houston to around 110 yards.

Houston passing offense: #28	Vanderbilt passing defense: #32   per att: #10
Houston interceptions thrown ranking: #43	Vanderbilt interceptions picked ranking: #6
Houston quarterback protection rank: #78	Vanderbilt pass rush rank: #62

Freshman John O'Korn led the Cougar passing game with 2,889 yards and 26 touchdowns. Deontay Greenberry, the heralded recruit now a sophomore, had 1,106 yards and 10 touchdowns with Daniel Spencer #2 with 764. Vanderbilt has a pretty good pass defense, especially in per-attempt terms; the Cougars might have around 260 passing yards.

O'Korn has thrown 8 picks which is not great considering the pass defenses he's faced, and Vanderbilt could be trouble; Kenny Ladler leads the team with 5 interceptions. O'Korn has been sacked 23 times, too.

When Vanderbilt has the ball

Vanderbilt rushing offense: #93

Houston rushing defense: #59

The Commodores don't have a great rushing offense either; Jerron Seymour leads with 627 yards and 13 touchdowns. Houston has an average rush defense and should give up around 125 yards.

Vanderbilt passing offense: #68	Houston passing defense: #108   per att: #64
Vanderbilt interceptions thrown ranking: #93	Houston interceptions picked ranking: #2
Vanderbilt quarterback protection rank: #111	Houston pass rush rank: #40

Austyn Carta-Samuels led the team with 2,268 passing yards, 11 TDs and 9 interceptions, and he did this with a torn ACL during the last several games. Top receivers are Jordan Matthews (1,334 yards) and Jonathan Krause (703). Houston's pass defense gives up a ton of yardage even if it's not horrible on a per-play basis; we'd expect around 270 yards from Carta-Samuels if he were playing, but he's getting the ACL taken care of and missing the bowl game. Freshman Patton Robinette will play instead; he had 488 yards and a 2:3 ratio.

Interceptions would already be a concern even with Carta-Samuels, as Houston ranks #2 in takeaways led by Adrian McDonald with 5. Robinette had 3 picks in just 69 attempts. He was also sacked a stunning 9 times, compared to 21 for Carta-Samuels (Robinette's rate is twice as high). Houston has a decent pass rush (Derrick Matthews leads with 7 sacks) but you don't need a great one to rattle Vandy and Robinette.

 

Houston's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Southern U.  W 62-13
   
2. @ Temple  W 22-13
   
3. = Rice  W 31-26
   
4. @ UTSA  W 59-28
   
5. Memphis  W 25-15
   
6. BYU  L 46-47
   
7. @ Rutgers  W 49-14
   
8. South Florida  W 35-23
   
9. @ #15 UCF  L 14-19
   
10. @ #18 Louisville  L 13-20
    
11. Cincinnati  L 17-24
    
12. SMU  W 34- 0

Houston bounced back from a dismal 2012 pretty quickly, going 5-0 before losing a tight shootout with BYU. They topped Rutgers 49-14 and battled Central Florida, Louisville, and Cincinnati close before losing 19-14, 20-13, and 24-17 respectively. They finished strong with a 34-0 shutout of SMU.

The offense wasn't great in the last four games but, surprisingly, the defense did pretty well. Houston wasn't a great team in 2013 but they have a resume as good as Vanderbilt's, even if they don't have a top 25 win.

Vanderbilt's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (1)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Mississippi  L 35-39
   
2. Austin Peay  W 38- 3
   
3. @ #9 South Carolina  L 25-35
   
4. @ Massachusetts  W 24- 7
   
5. UAB  W 52-24
   
6. #8 Missouri  L 28-51
   
7. #22 Georgia  W 31-27
   
8. @ #21 Texas A&M  L 24-56
   
9. @ Florida  W 34-17
   
10. Kentucky  W 22- 6
    
11. @ Tennessee  W 14-10
    
12. Wake Forest  W 23-21

Vanderbilt lost a close one to Mississippi in week one, and after a week 3 loss to South Carolina they were 1-3. A few wins later and they fell to Missouri 51-28. At 3-3 with Georgia and Texas A&M looming things didn't look good, but they upset the Bulldogs 31-27 before falling to the Aggies 56-24.

From there, they just needed two wins, and after upsetting Florida they won out, beating four losing SEC teams to finish 8-4. None of their wins was spectacular—not even the Georgia win—and 7 teams they beat didn't make bowl games. But 3 of the four teams that beat the Commodores finished in the BCS top 25.

Key Injuries

QB Austyn Carta-Samuels is out for Vanderbilt. For Houston, receiver Deontay Greenberry was questionable but is now listed as probable.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Houston's season: +3 wins; Vanderbilt's season: +0 wins
• Houston's momentum: -2 wins; Vanderbilt's momentum: +2 wins
• Houston won final game: YES; Vanderbilt won final game: YES
• Houston glad to be there? yes; Vanderbilt glad to be there: yes
• Houston time zones from home: 0; Vanderbilt time zones from home: 1;
• Houston coaching situation: stable; Vanderbilt coaching situation: stable?

Houston had a good turnaround year, going from 7-5 to 8-4, but that's dampened a bit by losing three of four at the end. Though Vanderbilt won four straight, Houston's final win was a 34-0 shutout rather than Vandy's narrow win over Wake Forest, so there's not too much difference in momentum. Houston's losses were all close and to the best teams in the AAC.

Vanderbilt's coaching situation is stable for now, but James Franklin is always in the rumor mill getting hired away by one school or another. Houston's Tony Levine is popping in rumors, too, though not nearly as much.

Final analysis

Vanderbilt is still a favorite with the oddsmaker despite losing QB Austyn Carta-Samuels, leaving them with Patton Robinette, a player with a 10% lower completion percentage who gets sacked twice as often and intercepted at a higher rate. We had a tight race going in without even considering the QB change, and that pretty much clinches it for us.

Neither offense seems like it has its shit together right now. Neither team can run the ball well, and the defenses are good against the pass. But Vanderbilt has quarterback issues, and that probably docks them about a touchdown at least.

The yardage estimate started with Vandy ahead by 3 but in the end they were down by 7. And that has no adjustment for missing a senior quarterback and replacing him with a freshman. Our power rating doesn't call it an upset, but I guess it counts; we take Houston to win.

Prediction:  Houston 24, Vanderbilt 17

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Orange Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Ohio State (12-1) vs. Clemson (10-2)

Friday, January 3: Orange Bowl in Miami, FL at 8:00 pm EST

#7 Ohio State Buckeyes (12-1) vs. #12 Clemson Tigers (10-2)

A strong card for the Orange Bowl, but both teams have something to prove after dropping their last game.

Vegas line/spread: Ohio State by 2 1/2 (over/under 71.5)

The Buckeyes are a very slim favorite; the game is expected to be quite high-scoring which seems reasonable given Braxton Miller and Tajh Boyd at the helm. The over/under started at 67 1/2 and rose 4 points before gametime.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Ohio State	55%	50.03%
Clemson	45%	49.97%

According to the Strength power rating it's #7 Ohio State vs. #13 Clemson—almost exactly what the BCS rankings say. The Buckeyes are a favorite straight up, but against the spread it's too close to call. Out of 24,336 cross-comparisons, Ohio State has a 14-comparison advantage.

Strength power rating:   Ohio State 40, Clemson 37     by Median rating:  Ohio State 42-34
Ohio State scoring offense: #5 vs. Clemson scoring defense: #27
Ohio State scoring defense: #37 vs. Clemson scoring offense: #8

Unlike many of the higher-up bowl games, the offenses ought to rule the evening in Miami. Ohio State is no longer the defense-first team they were for many years under Jim Tressel, and while Clemson isn't the same team that gave up 70 to West Virginia a few years ago, they are definitely better on offense.

Yardage analysis:   Clemson 41, Ohio State 38     per-play:   Ohio State 41, Clemson 34
Yardage differential: Ohio State #11 vs. Clemson #9
Ohio State total offense: #11 vs. Clemson total defense: #34
Ohio State total defense: #43 vs. Clemson total offense: #5

By yardage comparisons, Clemson is a field goal favorite. They should have just over 500 yards of offense and Ohio State will have about 25 fewer. But in the per-play score estimate, Ohio State is the winner again with a huge rushing per-carry advantage that overwhelms Clemson's big passing advantage. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Ohio State 46, Clemson 35

• Interceptions: Looking at interception totals you wouldn't guess a big difference, but using total pass defenses (picks + breakups) Ohio State gains a big edge here, expected to be around 2 1/2 points.
• Forced fumbles: The Tigers take back over a point based on projected forced fumbles.
• Sacks: Sacks could be important in this game as we see about 6 occurring—with Ohio State having a near 1-sack edge on average, worth about 1 1/2 points.
• Red zone%: Ohio State has the #1 red zone offense in our rankings, and that ends up being worth almost a touchdown extra.
• 3rd-down%: Ohio State gains another point here as they should do better on 3rd downs.
• Special Teams: Ohio State is #12 in the special teams ratings, and Clemson #96. That's a swing of almost 4 points.

Summary: The pendulum swings well over to Ohio State's side after adjustments, mainly due to red zone play and special teams.

When Ohio State has the ball

Ohio State rushing offense: #2

Clemson rushing defense: #26

Between Carlos Hyde's 1,408 yards and Braxton Miller's 1,033, not to mention Jordan Hall's 536, opposing defenses have their hands full. The three have 32 touchdowns on the year. Clemson's rushing defense corrects upward to almost top 25 quality, but that still means they might surrender about 300 yards on the ground to the Buckeyes.

Ohio State passing offense: #100	Clemson passing defense: #59   per att: #36
Ohio State interceptions thrown ranking: #17	Clemson interceptions picked ranking: #9
Ohio State quarterback protection rank: #31	Clemson pass rush rank: #3

Shockingly, the OSU passing game hasn't made much of a gain since last year. Miller passed for 1,860 yards with 22 TDs and 5 picks, and when he was injured Kenny Guiton added 749 yards with a solid 10:2 ratio. So at least the yards are efficient if not extravagant. Corey Brown and Devin Smith both have 655 yards. Clemson has a pretty average pass defense and OSU could have about 180 yards.

Clemson's defense goes for the ball a lot, but Ohio State has kept the picks low. Of more concern is the pass rush, where Vic Beasley has 12 sacks. Miller has been sacked 16 times vs. 231 pass attempts, which is a lot higher than their #17 ranking implies; Guiton helped by only being sacked once vs. 109 attempts.

When Clemson has the ball

Clemson rushing offense: #36

Ohio State rushing defense: #11

Roderick McDowell is Clemson's main ground gainer with 956 yards this year; QB Boyd adds 284 and 9 touchdowns. Ohio State has a very solid rushing defense however and should hold the Tigers to around 130 yards.

Clemson passing offense: #11	Ohio State passing defense: #109   per att: #52
Clemson interceptions thrown ranking: #55	Ohio State interceptions picked ranking: #49
Clemson quarterback protection rank: #81	Ohio State pass rush rank: #6

Tajh Boyd had another great year for Clemson, completing 68% for 3,473 yards and 29 touchdowns. His best targets are of course Sammy Watkins (1,237 yards, 10 TDs) and Martavis Bryant (800 yards). Ohio State's pass defense is porous, and based on their #109 adjusted ranking they could give up around 370 yards to Boyd and company.

Boyd has thrown 9 interceptions which is not excessive but not great. Their bigger concern is the fact that Boyd has been sacked 30 times, and Ohio State has 40 sacks on the year, led by Noah Spence (7.5), Ryan Shazier (7), Michael Bennett (7), and Joey Bosa (6.5). If Ohio State can rattle Boyd it could disrupt the Clemson offense and lead to a comfortable win. If not, Boyd might pass all over the Buckeyes. With Spence now likely to miss the game due to personal issues, it makes things a bit easier but there's still plenty to deal with.

 

Ohio State's season (12-1)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (1) to losing teams (0)

1. Buffalo  W 40-20
   
2. San Diego St  W 42- 7
   
3. @ California  W 52-34
   
4. Florida A&M  W 76- 0
   
5. #19 Wisconsin  W 31-24
   
6. @ Northwestern  W 40-30
   
7. Iowa  W 34-24
   
8. Penn State  W 63-14
   
9. @ Purdue  W 56- 0
   
10. @ Illinois  W 60-35
    
11. Indiana  W 42-14
    
12. @ Michigan  W 42-41
    
13. = #4 Michigan St  L 24-34

Ohio State had some early questions. They beat Buffalo by 20, and then Baylor beat the Bulls 70-13. They let 1-11 Cal score 34 points on them. They beat Wisconsin by a touchdown, 31-24, and Northwestern and Iowa by 10 each (40-30 and 34-24). So even at 7-0 there were questions about the Buckeyes.

They answered most of them with a 63-14 win over Penn State and a 63-14 win at Purdue. Needing style points, they racked up 60 on Illinois but gave up 35. The nail-biting win over Michigan, 42-41 on a missed two-point PAT, opened the discussion about whether the team could go undefeated for two seasons and be jumped by a 1-loss SEC team. The point was moot when the Buckeyes fell to Michigan State 34-24 in Indianapolis, their second stinker of a defensive performance in a row, and their first loss in 25 games under Urban Meyer.

Clemson's season (10-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (5)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (2) to losing teams (0)

1. #22 Georgia  W 38-35
   
2. South Carolina St  W 52-13
   
3. @ North Carolina St  W 26-14
   
4. Wake Forest  W 56- 7
   
5. @ Syracuse  W 49-14
   
6. Boston College  W 24-14
   
7. #1 Florida St  L 14-51
   
8. @ Maryland  W 40-27
   
9. @ Virginia  W 59-10
   
10. Georgia Tech  W 55-31
    
11. The Citadel  W 52- 6
    
12. @ #9 South Carolina  L 17-31

When Clemson beat Georgia 38-35 in week one it looked like the start of something great. It ended up being the Tigers' best win of the year. They zoomed to 6-0 (with a lookahead 24-14 win over Boston College) and prepared for the big showdown with undefeated Florida State. That turned into a slaughter, 51-14 at home, that threatened to derail the entire season.

But Clemson responded very well, even avoiding a letdown the next weekend against Maryland, beating the Terps 40-27. They started another winning streak, this time just four games before getting rolled by South Carolina 31-17. Though Clemson's defense isn't great, it's relatively consistent, while the team's ups and downs seem dictated by the offense.

Key Injuries

Clemson has some defensive players who are questionable including Travis Blanks, while Ohio State is probably missing sacks leader Noah Spence, a significant loss unless he returns from "dealing with personal issues". Overall both teams are pretty healthy.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Ohio State's season: +0 wins; Clemson's season: +0 wins
• Ohio State's momentum: +0 wins; Clemson's momentum: +0 wins
• Ohio State won final game: NO; Clemson won final game: NO
• Ohio State glad to be there? somewhat; Clemson glad to be there: yes
• Ohio State time zones from home: 1; Clemson time zones from home: 0;
• Ohio State coaching situation: stable; Clemson coaching situation: stable

These teams finished the season with the same record as last year—except that Ohio State took a loss at the end of this one. Ohio State takes a step down from the national championship game to the Orange Bowl, while Clemson knew since the FSU game that this was the best they were going to do, and they got it despite dropping their final game.

That final game, for both teams, is an albatross to overcome. It's a lot worse for Ohio State though.

Final analysis

A good matchup and a close game, you can look at the contest different ways and come up with a different winner, but in general Ohio State is the favorite for a good reason—their offense is a little better than Clemson's, and an offensive war usually favors the better offense.

A big key to the game could be quarterback pressure. Both teams are in the top ten in adjusted sacks and getting to the opposing QB on passing downs to disrupt the offense is critical. Of course, Clemson will be passing a whole lot more than Ohio State, so there is more for the Buckeyes to gain with a strong pass rush than for the Tigers.

But back to that final loss. Clemson took a huge hit against Florida State—it ruined their perfect season and shattered any illusion that they were among the very best teams. But they bounced back. They fell later to South Carolina—can they bounce back again? We can only assume they will, as the South Carolina loss was less damaging—they got into the same bowl they would have at 11-1.

Ohio State just took their first loss in two years. That's twice as hard to take as the first loss of the season. 24-0 and then, bam! 24-1. It's a new reality for them, and it destroyed everything they were working toward. Even though they're in a BCS bowl, it's hard to imagine the motivation is there, and even Urban Meyer has said it's been tough getting over the loss to Michigan State.

I don't think they'll be over it early in 2014, either. In a close game, emotion is a big factor, and can easily switch a game the other way. Clemson bounced back before and they'll do it again. Ohio State is more than good enough to win this game, but they might not have the will.

Prediction:  Clemson 31, Ohio State 23

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Cotton Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Missouri (11-2) vs. Oklahoma State (10-2)

Friday, January 3: Cotton Bowl in Arlington, TX at 7:30 pm EST

#8 Missouri Tigers (11-2) vs. #13 Oklahoma State Cowboys (10-2)

It's a Big Eight reunion as the SEC's Missouri and the Big Twelve's Oklahoma State meet again for the umpteenth time.

Vegas line/spread: Oklahoma State by 2 1/2(over/under 62)

It was tight with the Tigers by a point at the opening, but the public moved it to the Cowboys by almost a field goal by kickoff. The oddsmakers expect a pretty high-scoring game.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Missouri	47%	51%
Oklahoma St	53%	49%

Okklahoma State wins a slight majority of the game comparisons; they rank 8th in the Strength power rating while Missouri is #12.

Strength power rating:   Oklahoma State 32, Missouri 30     by Median rating:  31-31
Missouri scoring offense: #17 vs. Oklahoma St scoring defense: #14
Missouri scoring defense: #13 vs. Oklahoma St scoring offense: #10

Not only are both these teams borderline top ten squads, but each unit, offensive and defensive, can argue the same. It's top 25 football all around when these teams clash, and the Strength power rating projects a 2 point Cowboy win.

Interestingly, using each team's median score results in a practical tie; they rank #7 and #8 by this method, and Oklahoma state is less than 1/4 point ahead. Maybe that means an overtime game is the median outcome.

Yardage analysis:   Missouri 33, Oklahoma St 31     per-play:   Missouri 28, Oklahoma St 24
Yardage differential: Missouri #27 vs. Oklahoma St #30
Missouri total offense: #22 vs. Oklahoma St total defense: #37
Missouri total defense: #41 vs. Oklahoma St total offense: #30

Adding to the confusion, Missouri is declared the likely winner by yardage breakdowns. The teams don't rank as highly by this method but they're neck-and-neck still. Here, Missouri is expected to gain almost 450 total yards of offense, only about 10 yards greater than the Cowboys.

In the per-play simulation, Missouri's edge in rushing yards per carry slightly overcomes Oklahoma State's small edge in passing yards per attempt. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Oklahoma State 31, Missouri 27

• Interceptions: Missouri gets the edge here. Both teams have takeaway defenses but Missouri doesn't throw a lot of picks. There might be quite a few in this game, but on average we give Missouri a nearly 1-point advantage.
• Forced fumbles: Oklahoma State gets back around 1/2 point as they have a better shot at forcing a fumble.
• Sacks: Nothing huge here, but Missouri looks a bit better and nets around a point.
• Red zone%: This is a big edge for Oklahoma State. The Cowboys are #11 in red zone offense and #5 on defense (both corrected for schedule). We add a few points to their total and dock Mizzou over 4, for nearly a 1-touchdown swing possible.
• 3rd-down%: Third downs look tough for both teams due to the defenses, and this could impact scoring. We dock both teams over a point.
• Special Teams: According to ESPN advanced stats these teams are neck-and-neck—and not very good—on special teams, ranking 81st and 82nd.

Summary: After the various adjustments, the slim Missouri lead has turned into a slim Oklahoma State margin.

When Missouri has the ball

Missouri rushing offense: #15

Oklahoma St rushing defense: #40

Henry Josey made a strong comeback from a terrible injury suffered two years ago, and he got stronger as the season progressed, finishing with 1,074 yards. Russell Hansbrough and Marcus Murphy added another 1,200 yards and QB James Franklin had 474. That's a lot of weapons and a lot of yards, and Oklahoma State's decent-but-not-great (after correction) rushing defense will probably allow over 200 yards.

Missouri passing offense: #51	Oklahoma St passing defense: #46   per att: #4
Missouri interceptions thrown ranking: #11	Oklahoma St interceptions picked ranking: #3
Missouri quarterback protection rank: #69	Oklahoma St pass rush rank: #83

James Franklin was also back from injury suffered two years ago, which lingered last year. He threw for 2,255 yards, 19 TDs, and 5 picks and when he got injured again, Maty Mauk took over and had over 1,000 yards with a 10:2 ratio. With both Franklin and Mauk the Tigers have some insurance during the bowl game. L'Damian Washington and the heralded Dorian Green-Beckham both had over 800 yards and 10+ TDs, while Marcus Lucas adds 646.

Oklahoma State's pass defense is a paradox, ranking 89th in raw figures, 46th in corrected figures, and 4th somehow in per-attempt figures. We take this to mean that they should allow a maximum of 230-ish passing yards from Franklin and crew.

And even so, that doesn't mean those yards will result in points. Oklahoma State has a takeaway defense with 20 interceptions this year led by Justin Gilbert's 6; Missouri is lucky both Franklin and Mauk are careful with the ball. Sacks might be a concern for Mizzou despite Oklahoma State's poor pass rush, as Franklin has twice the sack rate as Mauk, 20 on the year.

When Oklahoma State has the ball

Oklahoma St rushing offense: #58

Missouri rushing defense: #15

Desmond Roland led the team with 745 yards this year (12 TDs) as the Cowboy running game took a step down from last season. Missouri has a strong rushing defense—unlike Oklahoma State, whose rushing defense corrects down from #23 to #40 based on schedule, Missouri's jumps from #48 to #15 due to the teams they play in the SEC—even including their last game with Auburn where they allowed 545 yards (300 from Tre Mason). They could hold the 'Pokes to around 115 yards assuming that last game was an aberration against the nation's #1 rushing team. But maybe Oklahoma State can learn something from that contest...

Oklahoma St passing offense: #23	Missouri passing defense: #96   per att: #15
Oklahoma St interceptions thrown ranking: #50	Missouri interceptions picked ranking: #11
Oklahoma St quarterback protection rank: #15	Missouri pass rush rank: #8

Last year's three-headed monster was a 2-headed monster in 2013, and it was about 2/3 as productive, too. Clint Chelf had 1,792 yards, 15 TDs, and 6 picks; JW Walsh had 1,333 and a 9:5 ratio. The two combined for 600 rushing yards, too. Tracy Moore, Josh Stewart, and Jhajuan Seales all had 500+ yards.

Missouri's pass defense is another wacked out case. They rank #101 raw and #96 corrected, per-game. But per-play? They are #15. Apparently teams are completing a whole lot of very short passes against the Tigers, who try to bend but not break as the yardage racks up. They might allow about 320 yards against the Cowboys if that happens.

The Tigers are good at picking off passes, though, with 18 on the year. And their pass rush is potent, with Michael Sam (10.5), Markus Golden (6.5), and Kony Ealy (6.0) all big threats. So far the QBs have been sacked just 11 times, though.

 

Missouri's season (11-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (2)
Losses (2) to losing teams (0)

1. Murray St  W 58-14
   
2. Toledo  W 38-23
   
3. @ Indiana  W 45-28
   
4. Arkansas St  W 41-19
   
5. @ Vanderbilt  W 51-28
   
6. @ #22 Georgia  W 41-26
   
7. Florida  W 36-17
   
8. #9 S Carolina  L 24-27 2OT
   
9. Tennessee  W 31- 3
   
10. @ Kentucky  W 48-17
    
11. @ Mississippi  W 24-10
    
12. #21 Texas A&M  W 28-21
    
13. = #2 Auburn  L 42-59

Missouri was one of the surprise teams of 2013. The early wins—Toledo, Indiana, Arkansas State—didn't warn anyone. They beat Vanderbilt 51-28 to start 5-0. But after they beat Georgia on the road 41-26, people had to take notice as they were winning the SEC East.

James Franklin was hurt in the Georgia win but the Tigers were 7-0 when they fell in double overtime to South Carolina, 27-24. Still, they won the next four games like clockwork, including a 28-21 win over Texas A&M, to get to the SEC title game and with it a possible BCS championship berth. There, the bottom fell out of the defense as they allowed 545 rushing yards and 59 points to Auburn. Look at the chart—the defense just falls off a cliff. That could be a confidence concern for the team, and was especially disappointing after the great job they did on Johnny Manziel. Worse, a win would have put them in the BCS title game.

Oklahoma State's season (10-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (2) to losing teams (1)

1. = Mississippi St  W 21- 3
   
2. @ UTSA  W 56-35
   
3. Lamar  W 59- 3
   
4. @ West Virginia  L 21-30
   
5. Kansas St  W 33-29
   
6. TCU  W 24-10
   
7. @ Iowa St  W 58-27
   
8. @ Texas Tech  W 52-34
   
9. Kansas  W 42- 6
   
10. @ Texas  W 38-13
    
11. #6 Baylor  W 49-17
    
12. #11 Oklahoma  L 24-33

Oklahoma State was 3-0, having beating Mississippi State 21-3 in the opener and scored 50+ twice thereafter, when they traveled to West Virginia and got ambushed 30-21. The Mountaineers went on to finish 4-8, leaving an embarrassing mark on the schedule.

But the 'Pokes recovered in style, beating K-State 33-29, Texas Tech 52-34, and Texas 38-13, the latter two on the road. Then they blasted Baylor giving the Bears their first loss—and a 49-17 loss at that. But then they went from by far their best game of the year to their 2nd worst, losing at home to Oklahoma 33-24, the defense that stopped Baylor's #1 defense unable to handle the Sooners the same way at all.

Key Injuries

Both teams are relatively injury-free for the bowl game.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Missouri's season: +6 wins; Oklahoma St's season: +3 wins
• Missouri's momentum: -1 win; Oklahoma St's momentum: +0 wins
• Missouri won final game: NO; Oklahoma St won final game: NO
• Missouri glad to be there? yes; Oklahoma St glad to be there: yes
• Missouri time zones from home: 0; Oklahoma St time zones from home: 0;
• Missouri coaching situation: stable; Oklahoma St coaching situation: stable

These teams had a similar trajectory: they improved greatly from last season (Missouri a little more), and both slammed into a wall in their last game, where a win would have put them in a BCS bowl instead of the "6th man" BCS bowl as the Cotton should be called.

Each team had a terrible final game. Missouri's defense was racked for 300 yards by Tre Mason, while Oklahoma State lost to rival Oklahoma. A win for Oklahoma State would have meant a Fiesta Bowl berth; a win for Missouri would have meant a shot at the BCS title.

Most likely, Missouri realizes this bowl is better suited to them if they can't keep a team under 500 rushing yards. But Oklahoma State would have been facing UCF in the Fiesta Bowl, not a bad proposition. But Missouri is the better opponent. We think both teams are reasonably happy with the Cotton Bowl despite what could have been.

Final analysis

This is a close, close game on paper. The oddsmakers take Missouri by a point, but the Strength power rating goes with Oklahoma State by 2. Then the yardage numbers point back to Mizzou, but the adjustments give it to the 'Pokes again.

I went in thinking that Oklahoma State had defeated more good teams than Missouri, whose win slate looked kind of blank. But reviewing the schedules they beat the same amount of winning teams, and Missouri beat two top 25 BCS teams (#22 Georgia and #21 Texas A&M) while Oklahoma State beat just one (#6 Baylor). But boy, that Baylor win was something. However, so was Oklahoma State's loss to West Virginia; that's much worse than a double overtime loss to South Carolina.

And then we get to the last games for both teams, games that were just about equally bad. A 9-point loss at home to Oklahoma, or a 17-point loss to Auburn on a neutral field? Hard to say. Missouri probably looked worse as their defense was shredded uncharacteristically, and that weakness raises a question as to whether it will be vulnerable to the Cowboys. But the 'Pokes are more of a passing team, and Missouri is vulnerable there, except they shut down Johnny Manziel? It's hard to figure out the Mizzou defense, except that in terms of scoring defense it was great until the Auburn game.

Looking at the game ratings, Missouri's Auburn loss was one point better than Oklahoma State's loss to the Sooners. We haven't picked any overtime games so far, so it's time: Missouri by a point in overtime, after tying at 31-all in regulation.

Prediction:  Missouri 39, Oklahoma St 38 OT

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Sugar Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Alabama (11-1) vs. Oklahoma (10-2)

Thursday, January 2: Sugar Bowl in New Orleans, LA at 8:30 pm EST

#3 Alabama Crimson Tide (11-1) vs. #11 Oklahoma Sooners (10-2)

Two of the most dominant programs in college football history square off in the Sugar Bowl.

Vegas line/spread: Alabama by 17 (over/under 52)

Alabama opened a big 15 point favorite and the line has moved to 17, making the Tide the biggest favorite of the bowl season.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Alabama	80%	43%
Oklahoma	20%	57%

The Strength power rating agrees, with Alabama at #4 and Oklahoma at #22. Alabama wins about 4 in 5 game comparisons straight up. Against the spread the Sooners have the slight edge.

Strength power rating:   Alabama 31, Oklahoma 16     by Median rating:  Alabama 33-14
Alabama scoring offense: #13 vs. Oklahoma scoring defense: #17
Alabama scoring defense: #2 vs. Oklahoma scoring offense: #37

Our power rating basically reflects what the oddsmakers are saying, with the Tide a 15-point favorite. They rank better on both offense and defense than the Sooners. When Alabama has the ball it's a fair game, but not the other way around.

Yardage analysis:   Alabama 24, Oklahoma 13     per-play:   Alabama 38, Oklahoma 22
Yardage differential: Alabama #5 vs. Oklahoma #26
Alabama total offense: #29 vs. Oklahoma total defense: #14
Alabama total defense: #1 vs. Oklahoma total offense: #51

By yardage things look really bad for Oklahoma's offense, which ranks just 51st and has to face the most yardage-stingy defense in the nation. By this comparison Alabama gains less than 400 yards and Oklahoma less than 300, and scoring is very muted.

The per-play comparison shows Alabama netting a yard more per carry and per pass attempt than the Sooners. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Alabama 30, Oklahoma 10

• Interceptions: Alabama has a slight edge here as AJ McCarron doesn't throw many picks. We give the Tide a point.
• Forced fumbles: Oklahoma is #122 in forcing fumbles, so Alabama gains over 2 points.
• Sacks: This is a dead heat. We see a strong chance of fewer than 2 sacks each, so we add about 1 1/2 points to both teams' totals.
• Red zone%: A BIG advantage for the Tide. They're #1 in red zone defense and could hold Oklahoma to 40% of possible points, docking them 3 1/2. Alabama should score normally in the red zone (about 70%)
• 3rd-down%: Again, we don't see Alabama converting more than the average 40% of 3rd downs, but they could hold the Sooners lower than that. We dock Oklahoma almost 2 points here.
• Special Teams: Alabama has the #22 special teams to Oklahoma's #54 unit, a 1 1/2 point difference.

Summary: Alabama started an 11-point favorite by adjusted scrimmage yardage alone and zipped past the Strength power rating spread to end up at 20 points after these adjustments. The Tide pretty much won every category, too; the possibility certainly exists for an Alabama blowout of the Sooners.

When Alabama has the ball

Alabama rushing offense: #24

Oklahoma rushing defense: #54

TJ Yeldon rushed for 1,163 yards and Kenyan Drake added 694 for the Tide. Oklahoma's rushing defense is almost top 25 in raw figures but they faced mostly poor rushing teams; their corrected ranking is #54 so they'll probably give up over 200 yards.

Alabama passing offense: #58	Oklahoma passing defense: #2   per att: #14
Alabama interceptions thrown ranking: #6	Oklahoma interceptions picked ranking: #59
Alabama quarterback protection rank: #14	Oklahoma pass rush rank: #46

AJ McCarron finished 2nd in the Heisman vote, mainly for his stellar career and win total, but this year he was particularly effective as he completed 68% of his passes for 2,676 yards and 26 TDs with just 5 interceptions. Amari Cooper and Kevin Norwood were the top two of many targets, combining for over 1,000 yards.

Oklahoma's pass defense is pretty damn good, however. They rank #2 in the nation in per-game yardage after correction, so they might hold Alabama to around 175 passing yards. They don't have too much hope of getting a lot of picks off McCarron, and their pass rush isn't great while Alabama's QB protection is solid. Big plays aren't in the works for Oklahoma but they probably won't need it when defending the pass.

When Oklahoma has the ball

Oklahoma rushing offense: #19

Alabama rushing defense: #4

Brennan Clay had 913 yards and Damien Williams 553 with a combined 13 touchdowns. Interestingly, Trevor Knight ended up with far more yardage than Blake Bell (438 to 255) at quarterback. Alabama's rush defense is rock-solid and Oklahoma will be lucky to get 150 yards on the ground.

Oklahoma passing offense: #90	Alabama passing defense: #8   per att: #17
Oklahoma interceptions thrown ranking: #30	Alabama interceptions picked ranking: #70
Oklahoma quarterback protection rank: #33	Alabama pass rush rank: #69

Blake Bell is supposed to be the runner and he passed for 1,648 yards while Trevor Knight had just 471. Bell had 12 TDs and 5 picks while Knight's ratio was 5:4. Not great numbers, especially the completion rates of 60% and 52% respectively. The Sooners don't look like much of a match for Alabama's pass defense and might approach 150 yards.

On the bright side, the Sooners don't have too much to worry about re:interceptions and sacks. Alabama doesn't have that many picks on the year. The Sooner protection is good (14 sacks) and Alabama's pass rush is surprisingly tepid overall.

 

Alabama's season (11-1)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (2)
Losses (1) to losing teams (0)

1. = Virginia Tech  W 35-10
   
2. @ #21 Texas A&M  W 49-42
   
3. Colorado St  W 31- 6
   
4. Mississippi  W 25- 0
   
5. Georgia St  W 45- 3
   
6. @ Kentucky  W 48- 7
   
7. Arkansas  W 52- 0
   
8. Tennessee  W 45-10
   
9. #16 LSU  W 38-17
   
10. @ Mississippi St  W 20- 7
    
11. Chattanooga  W 49- 0
    
12. @ #2 Auburn  L 28-34

Alabama started the season #1 and beat four bowl teams in a row at the start. Still, there were questions. They didn't show much offense at all in beating Virginia Tech 35-10  as defense and special teams scored 21 points. Texas A&M and Johnny Manziel again torched the Tide defense, this time for 42 points. The 31-6 Colorado State win and 25-0 Ole Miss shutout answered questions for the defense but not the offense.

After that, Alabama beat four straight losing teams by a combined 190-20 and some questioned whether they'd gone soft against such poor competition. They responded with an emphatic 38-17 beatdown of LSU and once again everyone was convinced. But the Iron Bowl was their undoing. People focus on the breakdown on "field goal return coverage" on the final play, but the bigger question is, if they were such a dominant #1 team why weren't they beating Auburn by 20 points at the time? The question for the bowl game is, how do they recover from that moment and take care of business in "just" the Sugar Bowl?

Oklahoma's season (10-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (5)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (2) to losing teams (0)

1. Louisiana-Monroe  W 34- 0
   
2. West Virginia  W 16- 7
   
3. Tulsa  W 51-20
   
4. @ Notre Dame  W 35-21
   
5. TCU  W 20-17
   
6. = Texas  L 20-36
   
7. @ Kansas  W 34-19
   
8. Texas Tech  W 38-30
   
9. @ #6 Baylor  L 12-41
   
10. Iowa St  W 48-10
    
11. @ Kansas St  W 41-31
    
12. @ #13 Oklahoma St  W 33-24

It's become an Oklahoma tradition: get 10 wins but don't really compete for the national title. This year started off well with a 34-0 shutout of ULM, but they turned out to be worse than expected, as did West Virginia and Tulsa, the Sooners' next two victims. They popped Notre Dame 35-21 on the road and edged TCU and at 5-0 some were declaring the Sooners a BCS title contender.

Certainly, the expectation of blowout out struggling Texas was as high as it has ever been. Following 63-21 last year and 55-17 the year before, it was a foregone conclusion that this year might top both those margins—and then the Sooners got spanked, 36-20, somehow. They barely had time to recover when Baylor flogged them 41-12 to end any hope of sneaking in the BCS race. But the Sooners responded very well and finished strong. In particular, beating rival Oklahoma State on the road 33-24 was an impressive development for a team that could have packed it in.

Key Injuries

Alabama could have some offensive line problems; Anthony Steen is reportedly out of the game after shoulder surgery, and Ryan Kelly was listed as questionable (but was practicing, however). But Oklahoma has a two O-linemen who are listed as doubtful, too.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Alabama's season: +0 wins; Oklahoma's season: +0 wins
• Alabama's momentum: -1 win; Oklahoma's momentum: +0 wins
• Alabama won final game: NO; Oklahoma won final game: YES
• Alabama glad to be there? no; Oklahoma glad to be there: yes
• Alabama time zones from home: 0; Oklahoma time zones from home: 0;
• Alabama coaching situation: stable; Oklahoma coaching situation: stable

Alabama was 11-1 last year, 11-1 this year. Oklahoma 10-2, 10-2. But the Sooners could easily have been out of the BCS bowl picture after their 2nd loss; they fought hard and, with some luck, got the bid. Alabama was sure to be in the title game until that kickoff return. Yes, they're in the Sugar Bowl, but it's not where they want to be. And losing a game like that can linger on, and on.

The question is how they respond. They either make the most of the situation and take out their frustrations on Oklahoma (which could mean an Alabama blowout win) or they let it stew, feel bitter, and come into the game with a bad combination of negative emotion and overconfidence.

Final analysis

Looking at raw yardage rankings, Oklahoma ranks #15 against the pass and #26 against the pass. But after correction for Oklahoma's defense, we see they have the #2 pass defense and just the #54 rush defense; this makes it clear that Alabama should have much more success running the ball than passing.

As for Oklahoma, they face a daunting challenge as they're no good at passing and their ground strength is up against one of the top rushing defenses. They're pretty much stuck with trying to overpower and/or out-execute Alabama's defense, unless Bob Stoops has some new tricks up his sleeve that Nick Saban hasn't anticipated.

That's probably unlikely. And neither is an Oklahoma win over Alabama. It has nothing to do with Saban winning big games and Stoops unable to do so. It's just that this Alabama team is a lot better than this Oklahoma team.

Alabama's sense of letdown after not getting to the BCS title game has to be stark. We've seen them come into the Sugar Bowl flat before—in 2008, they lost to Florida in the SEC title game after going 12-0. Then they lost to Utah 31-17, clearly still reeling from the earlier loss. On the other hand, 2010's 9-3 team showed no letdown as they spanked Michigan State 49-7. That shows again how Alabama might respond in one of two ways. After winning two straight championships, it's hard to see them thinking about making the bowl the first game of next year's campaign. Indignation and overconfidence might be the dominant emotions.

Oklahoma on the other hand responded to their 2nd loss by playing their best 3-game series of the season, and finishing with their best win, beating Oklahoma State on the road. If Oklahoma plays the way they did during that stretch, and Alabama counters with their final 3-game stretch? It's a 6-point Oklahoma win.

Can they do it? There are just too many factors pointing Alabama's way for me to override that with a stab at untangling the teams' emotional state. But I do think Oklahoma can keep it surprisingly close, and have a chance at the end to win it. Remembering Michigan's performance against Ohio State, no one gave the Wolverines a shot but they almost did it. I can see a similar situation, where Oklahoma fights valiantly but falls short on a 2-point try; Bob Stoops coming up empty yet again, but this time getting respect for it.

Prediction:  Alabama 24, Oklahoma 23

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Fiesta Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Baylor (11-1) vs. UCF (11-1)

Wednesday, January 1: Fiesta Bowl in Tempe, AZ at 8:30 pm EST

#6 Baylor Bears (11-1) vs. #15 UCF Knights (11-1)

This is decidedly not a showdown of big-time football programs, but here they both are in a BCS bowl, with identical 11-1 records.

Vegas line/spread: Baylor by 16.5 (over/under 70)

The Bears are a huge favorite, ranging from 16 to 17 points, the biggest of the bowl season. Total scoring is expected to be high, with the over/under moving up from 68 to 70.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Baylor	86%	67%
UCF	14%	33%

The game-comparison system agrees that Baylor should win, as they take about 7 of 8 trials. Even against the giant spread, Baylor wins 2/3 of the comparisons. Baylor ranks #2 to Florida State in the Strength power rating while Central Florida is just #44.

Strength power rating:   Baylor 51, UCF 27     by Median rating:  UCF 52-26
Baylor scoring offense: #1 vs. UCF scoring defense: #50
Baylor scoring defense: #33 vs. UCF scoring offense: #44

Baylor is a 25-point favorite by the Strength power rating, though the scores round to a 24 point margin. The Bears have the nation's #1 adjusted (or unadjusted) scoring offense and aren't bad on defense. UCF is pretty good on both offense and defense but not better than Baylor at either.

Yardage analysis:   Baylor 56, UCF 26     per-play:   Baylor 52, UCF 31
Yardage differential: Baylor #1 vs. UCF #43
Baylor total offense: #1 vs. UCF total defense: #53
Baylor total defense: #30 vs. UCF total offense: #38

Baylor is #1 in the nation in yardage differential, that is, in outgaining their opponents after adjusting for schedule. The results are much the same as with the score-margin-based power rating, once the projected yardage differential is converted to a score. We project Baylor to gain over 600 yards of offense and UCF to have just under 400, for a total of 1,000 yards between the two teams. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Baylor 63, UCF 23

• Interceptions: Baylor gets a small edge here due to almost never throwing picks.
• Forced fumbles: Another point for Baylor.
• Sacks: Again, advantage Bears. They should get an average amount of sacks while UCF might have just one; it's worth around 1 1/2 points for Baylor.
• Red zone%: On both offense and defense Baylor performs much better than UCF in the red zone after adjusting for opponents. This is about a 7-point swing to the Bears.
• 3rd-down%: Both teams should do all right on 3rd down, but Baylor might top 50% conversions. They net three points.
• Special Teams: Finally, an area where Central Florida gains on the Bears. UCF ranks #38 and Baylor just #116 in ESPN's special teams ratings. It's a 3.5 point swing toward the Knights.

Summary: Baylor's original 30-point edge has grown to 40 points when all is said and done.

When Baylor has the ball

Baylor rushing offense: #12

UCF rushing defense: #56

Lache Seastrunk had 1,060 yards and Shock Linwood had 862, most of that while filling in for Seastrunk and Glasco Martin (490 yards) when they were injured. Central Florida's rushing defense ranks 13th in the nation and would seem to be a good match—unless you correct it for the poor rushing offenses they've faced, after which it falls to #56. Expect the Bears, with all their running backs healthy, to put up around 240 yards on the ground.

Baylor passing offense: #5	UCF passing defense: #53   per att: #40
Baylor interceptions thrown ranking: #3	UCF interceptions picked ranking: #39
Baylor quarterback protection rank: #40	UCF pass rush rank: #82

Bryce Petty was one of the top newcomers of 2013 and he finished with 3,844 yards and a fantastic 30:2 TD:int ratio. Antwan Goodley paced the receivers with 1,319 yards and 13 TDs; Tevin Reece was 2nd with 824 and Levi Norwood added 670. Again, UCF's defense here is just average and Baylor should have around 370 yards.

It's unlikely Petty will throw very many picks this game considering he has just 2 on the year. Also, he's been sacked just 15 times, and the team's #40 ranking is hurt by the 5 sacks on backup Seth Russell vs. 43 attempts.

When UCF has the ball

UCF rushing offense: #62

Baylor rushing defense: #55

Storm Johnson topped 1,000 yards this year with 11 touchdowns. Baylor's rushing defense is a lot like UCF's—it ranks #25 in the nation in raw figures, but Baylor faced a lot of bad running teams so it corrects down to #55, making it comparable to the Knight's running game. Johnson and co. should have around 150 yards.

UCF passing offense: #30	Baylor passing defense: #24   per att: #30
UCF interceptions thrown ranking: #33	Baylor interceptions picked ranking: #17
UCF quarterback protection rank: #51	Baylor pass rush rank: #49

Blake Bortles had a great year for the Knights, with 3,280 yards and 22 touchdowns, completing 68% while throwing just 7 picks. Rannell Hall and Breshad Perriman combined almost equally for over 1,500 yards and JJ Worton added 665. Unlike recent seasons Baylor has pretty good pass defense but UCF will get some yardage here, probably around 240 yards.

Baylor's defense has 17 picks this year. Bortles has been sacked 21 times, and Baylor's Chris McAllister and Jamal Palmer combined for 11 on the season.

 

Baylor's season (11-1)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (1) to losing teams (0)

1. Wofford  W 69- 3
   
2. Buffalo  W 70-13
   
3. Louisiana-Monroe  W 70- 7
   
4. West Virginia  W 73-42
   
5. @ Kansas St  W 35-25
   
6. Iowa St  W 71- 7
   
7. @ Kansas  W 59-14
   
8. #11 Oklahoma  W 41-12
   
9. = Texas Tech  W 63-34
   
10. @ #13 Oklahoma St  L 17-49
    
11. @ TCU  W 41-38
    
12. Texas  W 30-10

Baylor rocketed to four striaght games of near-or-past 70 points on offense, beating Wofford 69-3, Buffalo 70-13, ULM 70-7, and West Virginia 73-42. They paused for a 35-25 win at Kansas State that showed they were human (and vulnerable), but put up 71 vs. Iowa State.

A 59-14 win at 3-9 Kansas showed they were less effective when they were visitors. So while they could handle Oklahoma 41-12 at home and put up 63 on Texas Tech on a neutral field, when they finally met a top 25 team on the road they were spanked 49-17. Some would say "exposed" but that implies they weren't one of the best teams in the nation; they were, but high-flying offenses come down to the ground every once in a while (even Oregon), and the Bears were missing RBs Seastrunk and Martin and WR Reece. Another road game was a near-loss to TCU, but back at home they humbled Texas.

UCF's season (11-1)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (1) to losing teams (0)

1. Akron  W 38- 7
   
2. @ Florida Int'l  W 38- 0
   
3. @ Penn State  W 34-31
   
4. # 9 South Carolina  L 25-28
   
5. @ Memphis  W 24-17
   
6. @ #18 Louisville  W 38-35
   
7. Connecticut  W 62-17
   
8. Houston  W 19-14
   
9. @ Temple  W 39-36
   
10. Rutgers  W 41-17
    
11. South Florida  W 23-20
    
12. @ SMU  W 17-13

UCF looked like a good team for the new American Athletic Conference, and in their opening two games they dominated Akron and FIU by a combined 76-7. They won at Penn State 34-31, and nearly beat South Carolina. They only beat Memphis by a touchdown but could have been looking ahead to undefeated Louisville, whom they defeated 38-35.

After that, all they had to do was win out to clinch a BCS bowl. They did, but there were some speed bumps along the way. The Knights took care of Houston 19-14, but needed to score 10 points in the last minute to beat 2-10 Temple 39-36. They beat Rutgers handily, 41-17, but sweated out narrow wins over 2-10 USF and SMU by 7 points total.

Key Injuries

UCF does not have any new or recent injuries. For Baylor, both Lache Seastrunk and Glasco Martin are back from their late-season injuries, and receiver Tevin Reece is expected to be back, too. That means the Bears' offense will be fully-loaded for the first time in a few months. On defense, however, starting linebacker Bryce Hager is doubtful to play.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Baylor's season: +4 wins; UCF's season: +2 wins
• Baylor's momentum: -1 win; UCF's momentum: +1 win
• Baylor won final game: YES; UCF won final game: YES
• Baylor glad to be there? yes; UCF glad to be there: yes
• Baylor time zones from home: 1; UCF time zones from home: 2;
• Baylor coaching situation: stable; UCF coaching situation: stable

Baylor went from 7-5 to 11-1, but UCF might be even happier about going from 9-3 to 11-1. For one, they never had a national championship on their mind like Baylor did midway through the season. And while a BCS bowl is a big deal for Baylor's program, it's huge for Central Florida.

The Bears arguably could have a letdown after "only" making it to the Fiesta Bowl, and some teams would be indignant at having to play a mid-major football program like UCF. But Baylor has long been a mid-major football program existing in a BCS conference and they're finally playing like a national contender. They'll be more than fired up to be where they are, and it doesn't matter who the opponent is. Being such a big favorite, there is a chance at overconfidence, but it seems Baylor is more concerned with proving the oddsmakers correct—or too conservative.

Final analysis

Baylor slipped a bit—or a lot—in their last three games, losing badly to Oklahoma State, beating TCU by just 3 points, and topping Texas but scoring just 30 points. Is this the same team that was putting up 70 against everyone?

First off, the 70 point spree was against lesser competition, and it always happened at home. Their two worst games came against teams with very good defenses and on the road, and they were shorthanded on offense for the last month of the year. With everyone healthy or close to it and playing on a neutral field, Baylor should be in top offensive form once again.

It's true that they may have lost some of the fire they had when they thought they were the best team in the country. But they've had time to digest the fact that they won't be playing for the national title, and that they are playing in the Fiesta Bowl, the biggest bowl the team's been in since at least 1981.

UCF had a great season and dodged many bullets against weaker opponents. They almost beat South Carolina and they did beat Louisville on the road, earning a spot in the BCS bowl system. Teams that come into bowl games 17 point underdogs are notorious—under the correct circumstances—for beating the spread and even winning outright. When the spread is that big, the underdog has nothing to lose and the favorite is often overconfident. That—and UCF's ability to stay in the game with anyone—gives them hope.

But we're thinking Baylor will be pretty fired up by bowl time to show how good they are, and UCF probably can't keep up. The Bears won't score 70 on the Knights but they'll have their offense rolling. Central Florida will score some points too, as the Bears have defensive lapses and still aren't top-notch in that department. We're guessing there will be lots of offense with Baylor winning by quite a bit.

Prediction:  Baylor 56, UCF 28

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Rose Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Michigan State (12-1) vs. Stanford (11-2)

Wednesday, January 1: Rose Bowl in Pasadena, CA at 5:00 pm EST

#4 Michigan State Spartans (12-1) vs. #5 Stanford Cardinal (11-2)

The Rose Bowl is a winner this year with two top-5 teams according to the BCS rankings, making it the #2 bowl of the season.

Vegas line/spread: Stanford by 6 1/2 (over/under 42.5)

Not surprisingly, Vegas expects a very low-scoring game. Stanford is a moderate favorite, with the line moving from 4 1/2 to 6 1/2.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Michigan St	34%	42%
Stanford	66%	58%

Stanford wins 2/3 of the game-comparisons straight up, and the majority considering the spread. The Cardinal are #6 in the Strength power rating, while Michigan State is only #17.

Note that we are not giving any portion of home field advantage to Stanford for playing in-state and much closer to home.

Strength power rating:   Stanford 21, Michigan State 12     by Median rating:  Stanford 18-16
Michigan St scoring offense: #63 vs. Stanford scoring defense: #1
Michigan St scoring defense: #3 vs. Stanford scoring offense: #21

These are clearly two of the nation's best defenses. Which is better? It depends on how you look at it. From a scoring perspective, adjusted for schedule, Stanford's defense is #1 in the nation, a fraction ahead of Alabama, and Michigan State is #3.

The difference is on offense where Stanford ranks in the top 25 and Michigan State is basically an average Division I-A team. This yields a 9 or 10 point difference in favor of Stanford and an expected 33 total points.

Yardage analysis:   Stanford 16, Michigan State 7     per-play:   Stanford 28, Michigan St 10
Yardage differential: Michigan St #24 vs. Stanford #7
Michigan St total offense: #84 vs. Stanford total defense: #4
Michigan St total defense: #5 vs. Stanford total offense: #32

Using yardage from scrimmage, adjusted for opponents, Stanford and Michigan State have the #4 and #5 defenses. Again there is a discrepancy between the offenses, with Michigan State ranking particularly bad in terms of production; the expected scoring drops further while the margin remains roughly the same. Our estimates suggest Stanford should gain barely over 300 yards of total offense but still have 75 more than the Spartans.

Per-play figures make Stanford a huge favorite, suggesting they could average 7.5 yards per pass play while holding Michigan State to 5 yards per attempt. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Stanford 17, Michigan State 3

• Interceptions: Despite the strong defenses neither team throws a lot of interceptions so there isn't much difference here; we give Michigan State about 1/2 point.
• Forced fumbles: For rarely coughing up the ball Michigan State gains about a point.
• Sacks: Michigan State is near-top-25 in both protection and pass rush, but Stanford is #10 in both. We give them about 1 1/2 points based on nearly one expected extra sack.
• Red zone%: We see both teams struggling a bit here, as MSU and Stanford are the #12 and #13 red zone defenses. We dock about a point from each.
• 3rd-down%: Michigan State has our #1 third-down defense. But Stanford is top ten in both offense and defense on 3rd down. The Cardinal should have a normal (40%) rate and Michigan State much lower, enough to dock over three points.
• Special Teams: Stanford has ESPN's #3 special teams while MSU is #34, a difference of 2.4 points.

Summary: Scoring gets whacked even further due to red zone play, and Michigan State becomes a wider underdog after adjustment.

When Michigan State has the ball

Michigan St rushing offense: #49

Stanford rushing defense: #1

Jeremy Langford was this year's star with 1,338 yards and 17 touchdowns, with a higher per-carry average (5.0) than Le'Veon Bell had last year. Stanford's rushing defense is killer, however—remember what they did to Oregon?—and they could hold the Spartans under 100 yards as they did in 9 of their 13 games.

Stanford's rush defense is #2 in raw yardage—to Michigan State—before adjusting for competition puts them slightly on top.

Michigan St passing offense: #94	Stanford passing defense: #18   per att: #3
Michigan St interceptions thrown ranking: #15	Stanford interceptions picked ranking: #81
Michigan St quarterback protection rank: #27	Stanford pass rush rank: #10

Connor Cook became the starter this year and did a pretty decent job, with just 2,423 yards but a solid 20:5 ratio. Bennie Fowler, Tony Lippett, and Macgarrett Kings caught the lion's share of passes with 1,500+ yards between them. Stanford gives up a lot more yardage through the air, but that's partly because no one can run on them. On a per-attempt basis, they are the #3 pass defense. Using per-game estimates, Michigan State should have around 150 yards.

Stanford hasn't nabbed a lot of picks this year and Cook is careful with the ball. But Michigan State's offensive line will be tested by Stanford's pass rush; Trent Murphy has an insane 14 sacks on the year and the Cardinal have 40 total.

When Stanford has the ball

Stanford rushing offense: #18

Michigan St rushing defense: #2

Tyler Gaffney returned from playing baseball to lead Stanford in rushing with 1,626 yards and 20 touchdown this year. Two others including QB Kevin Hogan topped 300. But they're up against one of the best rushing defenses is the nation in Michigan State. The Spartans rank #1 in raw yards yielded per game, and place 2nd to Stanford after adjustment. But it's a wash, really. Michigan State should hold Stanford to about 130 yards.

Stanford passing offense: #76	Michigan St passing defense: #14   per att: #2
Stanford interceptions thrown ranking: #29	Michigan St interceptions picked ranking: #28
Stanford quarterback protection rank: #10	Michigan St pass rush rank: #25

Kevin Hogan's first full season as a starter wasn't spectacular from a passing standpoint but he got the job done, with nearly 2,500 passing yards and 20 touchdowns. His 62% completion rate was down from last year's 72% when he started less than half the year. Ty Montgomery (937 yards, 10 TDs) led a new group of receivers with Devon Cajuste (591 yards) at #2. Michigan State passing defense is much like Stanford's—a bit "worse" than their rushing defense, but on a per-attempt basis one of the nation's very best. They should hold the Cardinal to 175 yards or fewer.

Michigan State is an interception threat and Hogan has thrown 9, which isn't bad but gives the Spartans hope for game-changing turnovers. MSU's pass rush is strong, too, with Shilique Calhoun (7.5) Denicos Allen (5.5) and Marcus Rush (5.0) leading the charge. But Stanford once again is among the very best at protection and Hogan has been sacked just 13 times, very impressive considering the team's they've faced. Having relatively few passing attempts has helped there, too.

 

Michigan State's season (11-1)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (5)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (1) to losing teams (0)

1. Western Michigan  W 26-13
   
2. South Florida  W 21- 6
   
3. Youngstown St  W 55-17
   
4. @ Notre Dame  L 13-17
   
5. @ Iowa  W 26-14
   
6. Indiana  W 42-28
   
7. Purdue  W 14- 0
   
8. @ Illinois  W 42- 3
   
9. Michigan  W 29- 6
   
10. @ Nebraska  W 41-28
    
11. @ Northwestern  W 30- 6
    
12. Minnesota  W 14- 3
    
13. = #7 Ohio State  W 34-24

No team—except maybe Auburn?—improved during the season more than Michigan State. At the beginning of the year they weren't very good, beating 1-11 Western Michigan by 13 points, and 2-10 USF by 15. They lost to Notre Dame and couldn't dominate Iowa, either, though that was their only bowl team victory in the first 2/3 of the season.

The 42-3 win over Illinois showed their offense had some life, but most people felt they'd be exposed once their "real" schedule started. Instead, they punched Michigan in the face, 29-6; won handily at Nebraska 41-28; beat Northwestern 30-6; and got past Minnesota 14-3. Even after four convincing wins Ohio State looked like too much for them, but the offense came alive with 17 early points and they won the Big Ten 34-24, earning a spot in the Rose Bowl. They're one team that's lucky their schedule was back-loaded—it allowed them to grow into the level of competition, and also to sneak up on teams despite having just 1 loss.

The defensive performances against Illinois (3 points) and Michigan (6 points) were incredible, as were all of their last three games.

Stanford's season (11-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (9)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (4)
Losses (2) to losing teams (1)

1. San José St  W 34-13
   
2. @ Army  W 34-20
   
3. #14 Arizona St  W 42-28
   
4. @ Washington St  W 55-17
   
5. Washington  W 31-28
   
6. @ Utah  L 21-27
   
7. #17 UCLA  W 24-10
   
8. @ Oregon St  W 20-12
   
9. #10 Oregon  W 26-20
   
10. @ Southern Cal  L 17-20
    
11. California  W 63-13
    
12. Notre Dame  W 27-20
    
13. @ #14 Arizona St  W 38-14

Stanford beat more good teams than anyone this year. They defeated nine bowl teams and four top 25 BCS teams (counting ASU twice). And they lost two games, leaving them just two victories over non-bowl teams.

After a 5-0 start consisting of four bowl-bound squads, Stanford was surprised by Utah who ended up 5-7. No problem: they beat UCLA 24-10, Oregon State 20-12, and dominated Oregon for 3 quarters en route to a 26-20 win. That made many suggest they were BCS-title worthy even when there were still four major unbeaten teams.

The 20-17 loss to USC put an end to that, but the Cardinal still had three strong wins to go and finished 11-2. The UCLA, Oregon State, and Oregon games were the best three-game defensive stand by any team this year, easily, and holding ASU to 14 points might have been the best performance yet.

Key Injuries

Neither team is facing any new injuries, but Michigan State will be without starting linebacker Max Bullough for disciplinary reasons, a development that USA Today says has "shocked" the team.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Michigan St's season: +5 wins; Stanford's season: +0 wins
• Michigan St's momentum: +2 wins; Stanford's momentum: +1 win
• Michigan St won final game: YES; Stanford won final game: YES
• Michigan St glad to be there? yes; Stanford glad to be there: yes
• Michigan St time zones from home: 2; Stanford time zones from home: 0;
• Michigan St coaching situation: stable; Stanford coaching situation: stable

Michigan State went 6-6 last year and 11-1 in the regular season in 2013. Stanford was 10-2 both years. That's not necessarily an advantage for Michigan State, but they will be maybe a bit more excited about being in the Rose Bowl for the first time since 1988 compared to Stanford, who beat Wisconsin in Pasadena last year.

Both coaches have been in the rumor mill concerning other jobs, but both have reiterated their committment to their current employer.

You could argue that Stanford also should get some portion of home field advantage since they are playing in-state, in their own time zone, and much closer to home than Michigan State is. But at most that might be worth a point; we would give HFA to UCLA or USC if they were playing the Spartans, but Pasadena is still 5 hours away from Stanford.

Final analysis

The quality and consistency level of these teams on defense is astonishing. It's countered, though, by lapses on offense by both squads. There's no doubt the defenses will play well; the offenses are hit and miss, meaning scoring might be moderate and it might be miniscule.

Both teams have good running games but that won't show against the team they're facing. The good news is they have extra time to practice against their own rushing defense which is the same quality they'll be facing in the bowl game.

It's the same story when passing. These defenses rank a bit lower in per-game yardage yielded, but both of them rank in the top few in the nation in per-attempt yards yielded, so they are arguably among the best against the pass, too. This is why there probably won't be a whole lot of scoring in the game.

Michigan State got better throughout the season and they're peaking at the right time. Stanford had a few lapses during an otherwise incredible year. If the Cardinal have another lapse now, they'll lose to the Spartans.

But mainly Michigan State is peaking on defense; the offense is better but still hit and miss, just like Stanford's offense. So how do we account for Michigan State's improved play? Looking at their chart, the last six games of the year represent the "new" Michigan State. If we compare the game ratings of their last 6 games against Stanford's last 6 games, the Cardinal come out just 1 point ahead rather than the 9.5 points for the full season.

That's pretty remarkable. One, that the game becomes so close, and two, that Stanford still wins a completely cherry-picked comparison that maximizes Michigan State's rating.

Both teams are peaking on defense (we'll have to see how Max Bullough's absence affects MSU, however), and that's bad news for the erratic offenses. We're going with a very low-scoring game here—unless the defenses set up some points, there might be very few. Both teams have good kickers so it may be a field goal battle; we took Stanford by a point originally, but we'll add another field goal with MSU's defense missing a top player.

Prediction:  Stanford 16, Michigan State 12

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Capital One Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: South Carolina (10-2) vs. Wisconsin (9-3)

Wednesday, January 1: Capital One Bowl in Orlando, FL at 1:00 pm EST

#9 South Carolina Gamecocks (10-2) vs. #19 Wisconsin Badgers (9-3)

The Capital One Bowl is often a mismatch with the SEC vs. the Big Ten, but this time it's pretty even.

Vegas line/spread: Wisconsin by 1 1/2 (over/under 51)

Vegas opened the line as a pick 'em, and a few places had South Carolina by a point; now Wisconsin is favored by 1 1/2 just before gameday. The over/under has remained constant at 51.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
South Carolina	57%	63%
Wisconsin	43%	37%

Wisconsin ranks #10 in the Strength power rating, while South Carolina is #15. A slim majority of the game-comparisons fall the Badgers' way.

Strength power rating:   Wisconsin 25, South Carolina 22     by Median rating:  Wisconsin 25-22
South Carolina scoring offense: #25 vs. Wisconsin scoring defense: #5
South Carolina scoring defense: #9 vs. Wisconsin scoring offense: #26

These teams are very well matched. Both have borderline top 25 offenses and top ten defenses. That's most interesting re: Wisconsin, who is normally built on killer offense via the running game. That's still there but their defense is the story of their season.

Yardage analysis:   Wisconsin 27, South Carolina 21     per-play:   Wisconsin 37-27
Yardage differential: South Carolina #12 vs. Wisconsin #8
South Carolina total offense: #27 vs. Wisconsin total defense: #7
South Carolina total defense: #16 vs. Wisconsin total offense: #26

Not much changes based on the adjusted yardage breakdowns. The Badgers become a slightly bigger favorite but still within a touchdown, and it's still a defensive battle for the most part. We expect Wisconsin to have almost 400 yards of total offense and South Carolina to top 350.

The per-play numbers show a wider margin for the Badgers, who could average over 6 yards per carry according to our estimates. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Wisconsin 31, South Carolina 13

• Interceptions: Interceptions probably won't be a big factor in the game; we give South Carolina about 1/2 point as Wisconsin has a bit of an interception problem despite their run-bias. Meanwhile, the Gamecocks almost never throw them.
• Forced fumbles: The Badgers run the ball a lot but don't fumble any more than South Carolina, and they force more on defense. We give them over 1/2 point (or rather, deduct it from SC).
• Sacks: Both teams should have a low sack total on average, with the Badgers gaining about a point due to less passing.
• Red zone%: Red zone play is a monster advantage for Wisconsin according to our numbers; they should score 80% of possible points inside the 20 while South Carolina scores about 50%. And it's not due to Wisconsin's offense, but their #2 red zone defense. This could be around a 7-point swing.
• 3rd-down%: Another comparison that favors Wisconsin, due to their defense (#5 in red zone defense, adjusted for opponents). This is about a 3 point swing, mostly reducing South Carolina's projected score.
• Special Teams: Wisconsin's special teams aren't great, reducing their total by a sliver. But South Carolina's rank 106th in the nation, docking them around 1 1/2 points. Their punting and kick returns are particularly poor.

Summary: A close margin for Wisconsin turns into a blowout when all is said and done. But the discrepancy from the Strength power rating estimate—and the Vegas line—is almost too big to take seriously.

When South Carolina has the ball

South Carolina rushing offense: #26

Wisconsin rushing defense: #3

Mike Davis made waves early with big games against tough opponents, and he had 1,134 yards and 11 touchdowns for the year. QB Connor Shaw added an impressive 511 net yards. But Wisconsin has one of the best rushing defenses in the country. Florida has a similar rushing defense and held Davis to 54 yards; Wisconsin might not do that but could limit the Gamecocks to around 120 yards.

South Carolina passing offense: #41	Wisconsin passing defense: #31   per att: #13
South Carolina interceptions thrown ranking: #1	Wisconsin interceptions picked ranking: #97
South Carolina quarterback protection rank: #42	Wisconsin pass rush rank: #53

Connor Shaw had a heroic year for the Gamecocks. Though he passed for just over 2,000 yards he had 21 touchdowns and just 1 interception. He famously entered the Missouri game while injured to win the game and save the day. Backup Dylan Thompson had 783 yards and a 4:3 ratio, making Shaw's sole pick all the more remarkable. Bruce Ellington is the go-to receiver, with Damiere Byrd #2; they combined for over 1,100 yards and 10 TDs. Wisconsin's passing defense is pretty good, too, and South Carolina might have around 230 yards.

South Carolina's 4 picks, after adjustment, rank #1 in the nation in fewest allowed—and only one of the four is Shaw's. There's a little more concern with Wisconsin's pass rush, as Shaw has been sacked 19 times and has had injury issues during the season and his career.

When Wisconsin has the ball

Wisconsin rushing offense: #7

South Carolina rushing defense: #28

As usual, Wisconsin had a great rushing offense this year. Melvin Gordon led with 1,466 yards and 12 touchdowns, and James White wasn't far behind with 1,337 yards and 13 TDs. Freshman Corey Clement added 515. South Carolina has a solid rushing defense, but the Badgers will have their yards, probably nearly 250.

Wisconsin passing offense: #97	South Carolina passing defense: #19   per att: #37
Wisconsin interceptions thrown ranking: #67	South Carolina interceptions picked ranking: #20
Wisconsin quarterback protection rank: #24	South Carolina pass rush rank: #54

Wisconsin's passing game isn't the focus and this year it isn't great. Joel Stave has passed for 2,400+ yards and 20 touchdowns with 12 interceptions. Jared Abbrederis is a very reliable target and has over 1,000 yards, and tight end Jacob Petersen adds another 500. South Carolina's pass defense is pretty solid and should limit the Badgers to around 150 yards.

Interceptions could further limit the passing game's usefulness to Wisconsin, but they don't pass all that often if they don't have to. Stave has been sacked just 15 times, as much a product of a low amount of attempts as good protection. South Carolina's Kelcy Quarles has 9.5 sacks as teams have focused on stopping Jadeveon Clowney, who might be due for a breakout game.

 

South Carolina's season (10-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (3)
Losses (2) to losing teams (1)

1. North Carolina  W 27-10
   
2. @ Georgia  L 30-41
   
3. Vanderbilt  W 35-25
   
4. @ #15 Central Florida  W 28-25
   
5. Kentucky  W 35-28
   
6. @ Arkansas  W 52- 7
   
7. @ Tennessee  L 21-23
   
8. @ #8 Missouri  W 27-24 2OT
   
9. Mississippi St  W 34-16
   
10. Florida  W 19-14
    
11. Coastal Carolina  W 70-10
    
12. #12 Clemson  W 31-17

South Carolina beat more top-notch teams this year than anyone except perhaps Stanford. They beat 6 bowl teams but more importantly, three top 25 teams: UCF (28-25), Missouri (27-24 in overtime), and Clemson (31-17).

But they lost an early game to Georgia, 41-30, struggled to beat 2-10 Kentucky 35-28, and lost to 5-7 Tennessee 23-21. That game almost derailed their season until Connor Shaw saved the day in the Missouri win; they were back on track and won out to finish 10-2. Their last two games, a 70-10 bombing of Coastal Carolina, and the Clemson win, were their best two back-to-back performances.

Wisconsin's season (9-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (3) to losing teams (0)

1. Massachusetts  W 45- 0
   
2. Tennessee Tech  W 48- 0
   
3. @ #14 Arizona St  L 30-32
   
4. Purdue  W 41-10
   
5. @ #7 Ohio State  L 24-31
   
6. Northwestern  W 35- 6
   
7. @ Illinois  W 56-32
   
8. @ Iowa  W 28- 9
   
9. Brigham Young  W 27-17
   
10. Indiana  W 51- 3
    
11. @ Minnesota  W 20- 7
    
12. Penn State  L 24-31

Wisconsin beat their first two opponents by a combined 93-0, but those were UMass and Tennessee Tech. They then lost to Arizona State 32-30 in the oddest of circumstances when Joel Stave sort of took a knee but sort of didn't, and the referees couldn't figure out what to do so they let the clock run out without the Badgers kicking the winning field goal.

A big win over Purdue followed as did a close loss to Ohio State, 31-24, and the Badgers were 5-2 with nothing to show for it. But they beat Iowa 28-9, BYU 27-17, and crushed Indiana 51-3 in an incredible defensive performance. After handling Minnesota 20-7 there was talk of BCS bowls, but they crapped out against Penn State in by far their worst game of the year, a 31-24 loss.

Key Injuries

South Carolina's #2 receiver, Damiere Byrd, is expected to miss the game along with their first and second-string fullbacks (a walk-on is starting). Wisconsin offensive lineman Dallas Lewallen is listed as questionable.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• South Carolina's season: +0 wins; Wisconsin's season: +2 wins
• South Carolina's momentum: +0 wins; Wisconsin's momentum: +1 win
• South Carolina won final game: YES; Wisconsin won final game: NO
• South Carolina glad to be there? yes; Wisconsin glad to be there: yes
• South Carolina time zones from home: 0; Wisconsin time zones from home: 1;
• South Carolina coaching situation: stable; Wisconsin coaching situation: stable

Wisconsin improved from 7-5 to 9-3 during the regular season, and went on a solid winning streak late in the year. But that last game was such a dud that one can't help but contrast it with South Carolina's strong win over Clemson.

Final analysis

We went into this review favoring Wisconsin; our power rating says so, our yardage analysis says so, and the adjustments we made to that based on other data really says so. And on a pick 'em game, there's no worry about the spread or how much a team will win by, you just have to pick a winner and everything else is forgotten.

But we're thinking that maybe Wisconsin peaked too early. That's a dodgy concept, often applied retroactively, but it seems to hold with the Badgers. Meanwhile South Carolina could be peaking at the right time based on their last few games.

Another contrast we see is in the teams' quarterback play. Connor Shaw is really a fighter and he gives it everything he's got. Maybe Joel Stave is, too, but there's such a contrast between their two most memorable moments—Stave screwing up taking a knee, and Shaw playing injured to beat undefeated Missouri—that we can't help but think in a close game, we've got to think Shaw will get the win.

And then there's the matter of wins. South Carolina beat three top 25 teams; Wisconsin beat three bowl-eligible teams. Sure, the Gamecocks' loss to Tennessee was piss-poor, but really no worse than Wisconsin's loss to Penn State.

And then there's Clowney. The guy has one last chance to further impress the pro scout and leave a memorable impression on this season, so he's bound to have at least one last "impact moment" during the game.

So what will happen? Does Wisconsin grind away with the ground game and run South Carolina into the dirt? Or will South Carolina control the game or get their 11th win? We're taking the SC side of the coin in a close game, probably a comeback win for the Gamecocks.

Prediction:  South Carolina 27, Wisconsin 24

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Outback Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: LSU (9-3) vs. Iowa (8-4)

Wednesday, January 1: Outback Bowl in Tampa, FL at 1:00 pm EST

#16 LSU Tigers (9-3) vs. Iowa Hawkeyes (8-4)

A rematch of the 2004 season Capital One Bowl that Iowa won on a last-second hail Mary.

Vegas line/spread: LSU by 7 (over/under 49)

The oddsmakers don't expect a lot of scoring in this one, and pick the Tigers by a touchdown (a very common spread this bowl season).

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
LSU	65%	47%
Iowa	35%	53%

LSU ranks #16 in Strength, Iowa #33. The game-comparisons fall LSU's way about 2/3 of the time.

The "against-the-spread" figures for the game-comparison system are interesting. Using whole-game values, LSU still wins 58%. But using both offense and defense ratings and combining them to get 144 game performances, Iowa actually wins the majority vs. the spread.

Strength power rating:   LSU 30, Iowa 22     by Median rating:  LSU 30-22
LSU scoring offense: #15 vs. Iowa scoring defense: #12
LSU scoring defense: #30 vs. Iowa scoring offense: #65

The best football will happen when LSU is on offense; at that point both units will be top-15 in the nation. When Iowa has the ball it's an average scoring offense vs. a solid but not exceptional scoring defense. Overall the Tigers are favored by 8 points here.

Yardage analysis:   LSU 25, Iowa 17     per-play:   LSU 38, Iowa 23
Yardage differential: LSU #15 vs. Iowa #35
LSU total offense: #24 vs. Iowa total defense: #11
LSU total defense: #18 vs. Iowa total offense: #68

The spread is 8 points when looking just at the yardage side of the equation, but scoring looks lower. By this analysis (adjusted yardage totals), LSU should have nearly 400 yards of total offense and outgain Iowa by about 60 yards.

A big projected advantage in passing yards per attempt makes LSU a 15-point favorite in the per-play projection, but those stats have Zach Mettenberger at the helm. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   LSU 29, Iowa 20

• Interceptions: Iowa might have a tiny edge here, almost negligible. Note that this is with Mettenberger at QB for LSU, so that side of the equation could be very different.
• Forced fumbles: Iowa has about a 1 point edge here.
• Sacks: Once again, Iowa has the advantage, as they protect the quarterback very well, ranking #5 in the nation in adjusted sacks allowed. They don't get many sacks themselves so the edge is only about 1 1/2 points.
• Red zone%: Iowa's red zone offense is poor, but their defense is good; LSU is pretty good on both sides. The result is that the Tigers should see average red zone play while Iowa loses about 2.5 points..
• 3rd-down%: Both teams should have pretty good success on 3rd down. LSU is #1 in the nation in adjusted 3rd down conversions, and Iowa #15. This should add back a lot of the scoring that the yardage evaluation removed; Iowa gets over 2 points, LSU more than 4.
• Special Teams: On average, special teams won't affect the game much; LSU is #62 and Iowa #68 in ESPN's rankings.

Summary: After adjustments, the total score is up from 42 to 49, matching the over/under, and the margin is up to 9, just above what the Strength power rating had. Note again that the data used in many of the comparisons above is dependent on Zach Mettenberger playing QB for LSU, and is affected by his absence. We'll have to try to address that separately later.

When LSU has the ball

LSU rushing offense: #31

Iowa rushing defense: #7

Jeremy Hill bolted to the front of LSU's running back committee, gaining 1,185 yards on the year and 14 touchdowns. Terrance McGee was #2 with 614 and 8. But Iowa has one of the nation's toughest rushing defenses and could limit the Tigers to under 150 yards on the ground.

LSU passing offense: #34	Iowa passing defense: #41   per att: #27
LSU interceptions thrown ranking: #10	Iowa interceptions picked ranking: #48
LSU quarterback protection rank: #63	Iowa pass rush rank: #76

Zach Mettenberger lived up to the hype this year, completing 65% for over 3,000 yards and 22 touchdowns with just 8 interceptions, all significant improvements over last year. His star receivers were Jarvis Landry and Odell Beckham, both of whom topped 1,100 yards with 18 touchdowns between them (that's well over 2/3 of the teams' passing yardage). Iowa's bend-don't-break defense gives up a fair amount of yardage and LSU would figure to have around 250 passing yards...

...if Mettenberger were playing. Instead, he suffered an ACL tear in the final game of the season and won't play in the bowl game. Freshman Anthony Jennings, who led LSU on a game-winning 99 yard drive to beat Arkansas, will play instead. He won the game with a 50-yard touchdown pass with just over a minute left. Other than that, there's not much to go on with Jennings, who has 99 passing yards and a 1:0 ratio, along with 49 rushing yards and 1 TD. So how do we adjust these numbers? Who knows.

Iowa intercepts the ball at a fairly average rate and their pass rush isn't lethal, so these areas might not have a big effect. The Hawks have had trouble in the past with dual-threat quarterbacks but this year they handled Devin Gardner and Braxton Miller reasonably well.

When Iowa has the ball

Iowa rushing offense: #40

LSU rushing defense: #18

Iowa was again paced by Mark Weisman's 937 yards but Damon Bullock and Jordan Canzeri came on strong late to combine for another 900+. LSU's rushing defense is #44 in raw numbers but considering the team's they've played (Auburn, Alabama, Arkansas, and that's just the A's) it corrects up to #18 and is probably more than a match for Iowa's offense. They should hold Iowa to around 150 yards.

Iowa passing offense: #89	LSU passing defense: #29   per att: #22
Iowa interceptions thrown ranking: #75	LSU interceptions picked ranking: #74
Iowa quarterback protection rank: #5	LSU pass rush rank: #43

Jake Rudock did pretty well in his first year starting for Iowa but the passing offense wasn't explosive. He connected for 2,281 passing yards and 18 touchdowns, with Kevonte Martin-Manley the #1 receiver with just 384 yards. LSU's passing defense actually corrects down from #16 to #29 based on schedule but is still solid enough to limit Iowa to perhaps 180 yards through the air.

Rudock has thrown 12 picks so he's vulnerable, but LSU hasn't had a ball-hawking defense this year without the likes of the Honey Badger. And on the QB protection front Iowa is pretty impervious, giving up just 12 sacks against strong pass rushes.

 

LSU's season (9-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (2)
Losses (3) to losing teams (0)

1. @ TCU  W 37-27
   
2. UAB  W 56-17
   
3. Kent St  W 45-13
   
4. #2 Auburn  W 35-21
   
5. @ #22 Georgia  L 41-44
   
6. @ Mississippi St  W 59-26
   
7. Florida  W 17- 6
   
8. @ Mississippi  L 24-27
   
9. Furman  W 48-16
   
10. @ #3 Alabama  L 17-38
    
11. #21 Texas A&M  W 34-10
    
12. Arkansas  W 31-27

LSU only beat three winning teams all season—but two of them finished in the BCS top 25. They also lost two games to top 25 teams.

The Tigers were 4-0 after beating Auburn 35-21, a win that, at the time, made LSU look maybe a bit weak as Auburn was 3-9 last year. LSU lost to Georgia 44-41 the very next week; later losses to Ole Miss (27-24) and a thrashing by Alabama took them out of the BCS bowl picture, but they dominated Johnny Manziel and Texas A&M 34-10 and won a close game against Arkansas to finish 9-3.

Iowa's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. #23 Northern Illinois  L 27-30
   
2. Missouri St  W 28-14
   
3. @ Iowa St  W 27-21
   
4. Western Michigan  W 59- 3
   
5. @ Minnesota  W 23- 7
   
6. #5 Michigan St  L 14-26
   
7. @ #7 Ohio State  L 24-34
   
8. Northwestern  W 17-10 OT
   
9. #19 Wisconsin  L  9-28
   
10. @ Purdue  W 38-14
    
11. Michigan  W 24-21
    
12. @ Nebraska  W 38-17

Three of the teams that beat Iowa this year finished 12-1: Northern Illinois beat the Hawks 30-27 in the opener; Michigan State beat them 26-14; and Ohio State won 34-24. They also lost to 9-3 Wisconsin (28-9) meaning that the four teams that beat them had a combined 6 losses, and that includes 2 losses as a result of interplay. All four finished in the BCS top 25.

After the NIU loss and a tepid 28-14 win over Missouri State, Iowa didn't look any better than the team that went 4-8 last year. They won at Iowa State 27-21, then a big 59-3 win over Western Michigan showed their potential and the 23-7 win at 8-4 Minnesota looked better each week. The Hawks stumbled from there against the Big Ten's best teams and needed overtime to top Northwestern 17-10, but they finished with three solid wins including an impressive 38-17 trashing of Nebraska in Lincoln.

Key Injuries

Clearly, the significant injury is to Zach Mettenberger, who won't play. Iowa's QB Jake Rudock was also questionable for the bowl game but he has been upgraded to probable.

LSU D-backs Corey Thompson and Micah Eugene are both doubtful to play. Wide receiver Odell Beckham has been upgraded to "probable."

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• LSU's season: -1 win; Iowa's season: +4 wins
• LSU's momentum: -1 win; Iowa's momentum: +0 wins
• LSU won final game: YES; Iowa won final game: YES
• LSU glad to be there? somewhat; Iowa glad to be there: yes
• LSU time zones from home: 1; Iowa time zones from home: 1;
• LSU coaching situation: stable; Iowa coaching situation: stable

Iowa is clearly happier about their bowl situation than LSU. First off, Iowa had a losing season last year and didn't go to a bowl game. LSU played for the national title 2 years ago and anything short of that is a bummer.

The level of expectation at these schools can be seen in how their coach is viewed. Les Miles is probably close to being on the hot seat after a single-digit winning season. Kirk Ferentz is definitely off the hot seat (which he never was truly on) after winning 8 games. If Les Miles went 4-8 he would be canned for sure. So the fact that these teams are only one win apart says that Iowa is very pleased, LSU is fairly disgruntled. This may show up in their performance on New Year's Day.

Final analysis

Based on Iowa's record this year it takes a BCS top 25 team to defeat them. The bad news for the Hawks is that LSU is such a team. But LSU has bad news of its own: they're missing their starting quarterback. How that will affect them, one can only speculate.

Backup QB Anthony Jennings did great against Arkansas on one drive, not enough to judge him by. But given the clutch performance in a tough situation, the Tigers will be all right.

But the rest of the team? It's hard to say how pumped up LSU will be for the Outback Bowl. It's a mid-tier bowl despite being on New Year's Day, and LSU likely views their opponent as a pushover. Iowa was 4-8 last year, plays in the much-maligned Big Ten, and doesn't have a flashy offense or a fearsome reputation. The LSU defense shut down Johnny Manziel, do they need to even bother trying against Jake Rudock? The players might derive some revenge motivation for the 2004 season bowl loss—if they remember it from when they were 10 years old. Needless to say, we see the potential for major overconfidence on LSU's part.

Iowa should be pretty pumped up, on the other hand. They're playing their best football of the year on a 3-game winning streak. LSU barely survived Arkansas, while Iowa dominated Nebraska. LSU's performance isn't about having Mettenberger or not—their two star receivers will make things easy for the backup—but the team as a whole might not have a killer instinct, and when that happens, teams get surprised. We're picking the upset.

Prediction:  Iowa 30, LSU 17

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Heart of Dallas Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: North Texas (8-4) vs. UNLV (7-5)

Wednesday, January 1: Heart of Dallas Bowl in Dallas, TX at Noon EST

North Texas Mean Green (8-4) vs. UNLV Rebels (7-5)

Both these teams had huge turnaround seasons in 2013.

Vegas line/spread: North Texas by 6 1/2 (over/under 54.5)

North Texas is almost a touchdown favorite.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
North Texas	73%	58%
UNLV	27%	42%

Neither team is a powerhouse, but North Texas is at least average—#64 in the nation—while UNLV is below-average for the FBS (Division I-A) at #88. The Mean Green win a large majority of the game-comparisons, and a comfortable margin against the spread. Note that we give North Texas home field advantage for playing close to home.

Strength power rating:   North Texas 32, UNLV 22     by Median rating:  North Texas 31-23
North Texas scoring offense: #94 vs. UNLV scoring defense: #120
North Texas scoring defense: #41 vs. UNLV scoring offense: #72

North Texas wins with defense. Their scoring offense is a paltry #94 but the defense is a very respectable #41, both figures adjusted for opposition of course. UNLV, on the other hand, wins with...well, we're not sure what they win with as their offense is poor and their defense is downright awful (#120 out of all teams of all divisions).

Yardage analysis:   North Texas 30, UNLV 24     per-play:   North Texas 28, UNLV 24
Yardage differential: North Texas #78 vs. UNLV #83
North Texas total offense: #83 vs. UNLV total defense: #90
North Texas total defense: #59 vs. UNLV total offense: #66

The yardage breakdowns suggest a closer game, pretty much the exact score that the Vegas odds predict. This suggests that North Texas does something good, unrelated to pure yardage, that converts yardage to points better than UNLV does. We'll see if the adjustments in the next section capture that.

For now, note that the adjusted yardage breakdown predicts the Mean Green will top 400 yards of offense and outgain the Rebels by around 35 yards. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   North Texas 41, UNLV 14

• Interceptions: There's no real advantage here and interceptions are tough to predict anyway.
• Forced fumbles: Neither team is likely to force a lot of fumbles as neither coughs it up a lot, but North Texas gains just over 1/2 point here.
• Sacks: The Mean Green are almost sack-proof and possess a much better pass rush, too. They might have 3 sacks and UNLV might have zero; on average, we see about a 2-sack gap, which translates to around a 4 1/2 point edge to North Texas.
• Red zone%: This area is a huge advantage for North Texas. Remember how we noted that somehow, North Texas is making more points out of its yardage than UNLV? Here's the main reason. UNLV ranks just 97th in red zone offense and 106th on defense. Meanwhile the Mean Green are great at red zone defense and might limit to Rebels to less than 50% of potential points there. We give North Texas a few points and dock 5 points from UNLV, a 1-touchdown swing.
• 3rd-down%: Third down conversion rates (adjusted for opponents, like everything here is) favor the Mean Green, too. It's about a 3 1/2 point swing due mostly to UNLV's poor offense and defense on 3rd down.
• Special Teams: We use ESPN's advanced stats special teams breakdowns here, and find that North Texas is #4 in the nation on special teams. They're excellent on punt and kickoff returns, and while their kicking game isn't great, they are tied for #1 in the nation with 7 blocked kicks. All of this adds 3.6 points to their total while UNLV is just #107 and loses 1.7 points.

Summary: We wondered if the adjustments to the 6-point yardage estimate spread would move things back toward the 10-point Strength power rating spread...well it did all that and more, ending up at 27 points.

When North Texas has the ball

North Texas rushing offense: #70

UNLV rushing defense: #106

The Green are paced by senior Brandin Byrd's 1,023 rushing yards and 11 touchdowns. They lost their #3 and #5 rushers in late November but #2 Antoinne Jimmerson (428) is available. North Texas has the #48 rushing team in raw numbers but correcting for their weak schedule drops them to #70. No matter; that's still more than a match for UNLV's poor rush defense. They should have over 200 yards.

North Texas passing offense: #82	UNLV passing defense: #50   per att: #41
North Texas interceptions thrown ranking: #99	UNLV interceptions picked ranking: #77
North Texas quarterback protection rank: #8	UNLV pass rush rank: #86

Derek Thompson had an almost identical season to last year's effort, with 2,640 yards, 14 touchdowns, and 13 picks. His completion percentage went up so he accomplished this with fewer attempts. Senior wide receivers Brelan Chancellor and Darnell Smith lead with 718 and 716 yards, though Smith has 65 catches to Chancellor's 47.

UNLV's pass defense ranks #50, a very suspect number for a team with such a terrible rush defense. Normally the reality is that opponents just don't bother to pass when they can so easily run the ball, and therefore pass yardage remains limited. But in this case UNLV is the real deal, as their #41 per-attempt ranking shows. They should hold the Mean Green to just over 200 yards.

Thompson does throw picks, but UNLV isn't a ball-hawking defense, with just 11 interceptions this year. When it comes to quarterback protection, North Texas can boast another fantastic effort by the offensive line which gave up just 10 sacks, up only a few from last year's 6.

When UNLV has the ball

UNLV rushing offense: #69

North Texas rushing defense: #52

Tim Cornett rushed for 1,251 yards and 15 touchdowns for the Rebels, and QB Caleb Herring was #3 with 313 net yards. The Mean Green look incredible by raw numbers, ranking 18th in the nation in rush defense. But correct for the piss-poor rushing team's they've faced and that becomes a lot more pedestrian. Still, they should be strong enough to hold Cornett and UNLV to under 150 yards on the ground.

UNLV passing offense: #50	North Texas passing defense: #76   per att: #86
UNLV interceptions thrown ranking: #66	North Texas interceptions picked ranking: #23
UNLV quarterback protection rank: #62	North Texas pass rush rank: #23

Caleb Herring retook the QB spot after a year at wide receiver and had a solid comeback. He passed for just over 2,500 yards with a sensational 22:4 TD:int ratio. DeVante Davis is the #1 target with 1,194 receiving yards and 14 touchdowns. North Texas doesn't have great pass defense so expect the Herring-Davis connection to contribute most of UNLV's nearly 250 yards.

The numbers show a middling ranking for UNLV on interceptions, but that's due to Nick Sherry's 5 picks (on 75 attempts). Assuming Herring is the one throwing the ball, that ranking is misleadingly poor. Still, North Texas is an interception threat led by Marcus Trice's 5 picks. The Mean Green pass rush is dangerous, too, led by Aaron Bellazin with 7.5 sacks and Brandon McCoy with 5; Herring has been sacked 19 times this year.

 

North Texas's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Idaho  W 40- 6
   
2. @ Ohio U.  L 21-27
   
3. Ball St  W 34-27
   
4. @ #22 Georgia  L 21-45
   
5. @ Tulane  L 21-24
   
6. M. Tennessee St  W 34- 7
   
7. @ Louisiana Tech  W 28-13
   
8. @ Southern Miss  W 55-14
   
9. Rice  W 28-16
   
10. UTEP  W 41- 7
    
11. Texas-San Antonio  L 13-21
    
12. @ Tulsa  W 42-10

North Texas had a rocky early season after the 40-6 Idaho win. They lost 27-21 to Ohio, 45-21 to Georgia, and 24-21 to Tulane. But even though they were 2-3, the 34-27 win over Ball State looked better each week as the Cardinals finished 10-2.

And the Mean Green's record grew better each week, too, as they won 5 straight games including a solid 34-7 win over MTSU and a 28-16 win over 10-3 Rice (their 2nd win over a team with double-digit wins). Perhaps overconfidence set in against UTSA that led to the 21-13 home loss, but they responded with their best effort yet, a 42-10 trashing of Tulsa on the road.

UNLV's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (2)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. @ Minnesota  L 23-51
   
2. Arizona  L 13-58
   
3. Central Michigan  W 31-21
   
4. Western Illinois  W 38- 7
   
5. @ New Mexico  W 56-42
   
6. Hawai`i  W 39-37
   
7. @ #20 Fresno St  L 14-38
   
8. @ Nevada  W 27-22
   
9. San José St  L 24-34
   
10. Utah St  L 24-28
    
11. @ Air Force  W 41-21
    
12. San Diego St  W 45-19

UNLV was pretty certain to lose to Minnesota and Arizona, so the 0-2 start was nothing to worry about—except for the fact that the Rebels gave up over 50 points in each game.

From there, things got much better. They won four straight games before losing another game, and only gave up 38 to Fresno State. They fell also to San Jose State 34-24 and Utah State just 28-24, and finished with two solid wins; the last game, a 45-19 clobbering of San Diego State, was their best game of the year.

Key Injuries

North Texas doesn't have any significant new injuries. UNLV might be missing starting d-back Frank Crawford.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• North Texas's season: +4 wins; UNLV's season: +5 wins
• North Texas's momentum: +2 wins; UNLV's momentum: -1 win
• North Texas won final game: YES; UNLV won final game: YES
• North Texas glad to be there? yes; UNLV glad to be there: yes
• North Texas time zones from home: 0; UNLV time zones from home: 2;
• North Texas coaching situation: stable; UNLV coaching situation: stabilized

Both teams had HUGE turnarounds in 2013. North Texas was 4-8 last year and finished 8-4. UNLV was a dismal 2-11 and won 7 games this year. That's both good and bad for the bowl season—sometimes teams make a "goal" of reaching a bowl game and don't follow through with performance come game time. But if that's the case then both teams are in the same boat.

They also won big in their final game, so they're coming in with confidence, and should be fired up to be here. It's pretty safe to say that a New Year's Day bowl didn't appear to be in the offing at the beginning of the season!

Both coaches have to be happy that they've made their teams winners, Dan McCarney in his 3rd year at North Texas, and Bobby Hauck in his 4th (after three straight 2-win seasons).

It's important to note that North Texas is playing 40 miles from their Denton, Texas home. Neither team is a major football power and it's a lot easier for fans to commit to travel an hour in a car than book a 2 1/2 hour flight to see their team on New Year's Day.

Final analysis

We're seeing a North Texas blowout here, we'll be honest. Going with a big margin win is tough, since bowl games—especially the lower-rung games—can confound any analysis and the team you think will be doing the blowout out gets blown out instead. But we see only two ways to look at the game that makes it close, and both still result in a narrow win for North Texas.

One, look at UNLV's last effort, their best of the year. That win would beat almost any game North Texas put together—except for North Texas' last game, which was even better. Assume both teams put their best foot forward and you have a 4-point North Texas win.

Two, look at UNLV's first two games—then throw them away. Those defensive efforts were horrible and the team was never that bad again. Assuming the defense does about as well as they did in the next ten games adds maybe 4 points to UNLV, and using the Strength power rating estimate that's around a 6.5-point North Texas win, matching the Vegas line.

But we're still sort of stunned at how much the 6-point yardage estimate grew out of control when every area analyzed showed an edge for North Texas. We'll dock a point from North Texas due to UNLV's erroneous interceptions rate caused by the backup QB and pick a big win for the Mean Green in a near-home game.

Prediction:  North Texas 40, UNLV 14

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013-2014 Gator Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Georgia (8-4) vs. Nebraska (8-4)

Wednesday, January 1: Gator Bowl in Jacksonville, FL at Noon EST

#22 Georgia Bulldogs (8-4) vs. Nebraska Cornhuskers (8-4)

Two traditional powers meet in the Gator Bowl after hard-luck seasons.

Vegas line/spread: Georgia by 9 (over/under 60)

Georgia is a pretty solid favorite at 9 points in a game expected to be higher-scoring.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Georgia	74%	54%
Nebraska	26%	46%

While Georgia is probably better than their record—they're #20 in the Strength power rating—Nebraska is only #52. Not surprisingly almost 3/4 of the game-comparisons fall Georgia's way, and the Bulldogs win the majority vs. the spread.

Strength power rating:   Georgia 40, Nebraska 30     by Median rating:  Georgia 42-28
Georgia scoring offense: #11 vs. Nebraska scoring defense: #63
Georgia scoring defense: #52 vs. Nebraska scoring offense: #40

The remarkable thing about these teams is the weakness of their defenses; Georgia is #52 in adjusted scoring defense and Nebraska #63. That's bad news for the Cornhuskers going against a near-top-10 Georgia offense—though one that will be without its 4-year starting quarterback.

Yardage analysis:   Georgia 41, Nebraska 23     per-play:   Georgia 41, Nebraska 21
Yardage differential: Georgia #10 vs. Nebraska #49
Georgia total offense: #10 vs. Nebraska total defense: #40
Georgia total defense: #35 vs. Nebraska total offense: #61

Looking at yardage instead of the scoreboard, Georgia is a top ten team. And strangely Nebraska's rankings on offense and defense have essentially flip-flopped. The Cornhuskers hardly gain yardage on offense but manage to score, and they give up a reasonable amount on defense only to see their opponents score a lot of points.

Regardless, using these opponent-adjusted rankings we estimate Georgia will have nearly 500 yards of offense, well over 100 more than Nebraska. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Georgia 47, Nebraska 21

• Interceptions: We give Georgia the slight edge here (less than a point) but the data we're using for Georgia is for Aaron Murray who won't be playing.
• Forced fumbles: Neither Georgia nor Nebraska forces a lot of fumbles, but the Cornhuskers are the worst in the nation in terms of coughing up the ball. This is almost a 4-point swing in favor of the Bulldogs.
• Sacks: Georgia's expected number of sacks is a bit higher than Nebraska's, working out to about 1 1/2 points advantage.
• Red zone%: Both teams should do well in the red zone, as both offenses are strong there and both defenses are poor inside the 20! We give Georgia almost 5 extra points and the Cornhuskers about 2.
• 3rd-down%: It's a different situation on 3rd downs, where Nebraska has the #3 adjusted defense but a poor 3rd down conversion rate on offense. Hence, both teams should convert at a below-average rate. We dock Georgia 2 1/2 points and Nebraska one.
• Special Teams: Nebraska's special teams are about average, ranking #64; Georgia's are only slightly better. Not much change here.

Summary: The gap widens instead of shrinking toward the Strength power rating estimate. Note also that many of these categories could be affected greatly by Aaron Murray's absence.

When Georgia has the ball

Georgia rushing offense: #27

Nebraska rushing defense: #63

Todd Gurley missed three full games and still had 903 yards this year in the SEC, along with 10 touchdowns. Nebraska's rushing defense is very suspect and we expect Georgia to have at least 200 yards, probably considerably more if they lean on the running game.

Georgia passing offense: #16	Nebraska passing defense: #30   per att: #61
Georgia interceptions thrown ranking: #23	Nebraska interceptions picked ranking: #72
Georgia quarterback protection rank: #25	Nebraska pass rush rank: #38

Aaron Murray threw for 3,000+ yards and 26 touchdowns vs. 9 picks in his senior year before an ACL tear against Kentucky. Hutson Mason started against Georgia Tech and did reasonable well—and got the overtime win. He has 648 yards for the year and a 4:2 ratio. Nebraska's pass defense is pretty good, though not great on a per-play basis (teams run the ball on them more?). Georgia would have nearly 300 yards if Murray were available, but some of that will shift to the running game.

Murray threw just 9 picks on the year, which is about average but is excellent considering the teams he faced, ranking in the top 25 when adjusted. He was also sacked just 13 times, which is exceptional for the SEC. However, Murray isn't the one who will be behind center, that will be Mason, who has been sacked 5 times, roughly double Murray's rate—another reason why the Bulldogs will probably be running the ball more. Randy Gregory has 8.5 sacks for the Cornhuskers.

When Nebraska has the ball

Nebraska rushing offense: #23

Georgia rushing defense: #13

Ameer Abdullah had a fantastic year, topping 1,500 yards with 8 touchdowns. Nebraska didn't have the normal yardage from the QB position this year as Taylor Martinez contributed just 117 net yards. Georgia has a solid rushing defense and this will be a real battle; expect the Cornhuskers to have around 170 yards.

Nebraska passing offense: #98	Georgia passing defense: #82   per att: #47
Nebraska interceptions thrown ranking: #87	Georgia interceptions picked ranking: #95
Nebraska quarterback protection rank: #37	Georgia pass rush rank: #16

With Taylor Martinez (667 yards, 10 TDs) hurt most of the year, the starts went to Ron Kellogg III (919 yards, 6 TDs, 3 int) and Tommy Armstrong Jr (803 yards, 7:7). Kellogg started the last two games due to an injury to Armstrong, but he's healthy now. Quincy Enunwa and Kenny Bell are the top receivers, combining for nearly 1,200 yards and 14 touchdowns.

Kellogg has thrown 3 picks and been sacked 7 times; Armstrong has thrown 7 picks and been sacked 3 times. Since Georgia's pass rush is pretty daunting, with 32 sacks on the year and three players (Leonard Floyd, Ray Drew, and Garrison Smith) with 6+ sacks, Armstrong might be the better bet.

 

Georgia's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (2)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. @ #12 Clemson  L 35-38
   
2. #9 South Carolina  W 41-30
   
3. North Texas  W 45-21
   
4. #16 LSU  W 44-41
   
5. @ Tennessee  W 34-31 OT
   
6. #8 Missouri  L 26-41
   
7. @ Vanderbilt  L 27-31
   
8. = Florida  W 23-20
   
9. Appalachian St  W 45- 6
   
10. @ #2 Auburn  L 38-43
    
11. Kentucky  W 59-17
    
12. @ Georgia Tech  W 41-34 2OT

Georgia's early schedule was certainly the toughest in the nation, with three BCS top 25 finishers out of four bowl teams. The Bulldogs dropped a close on against Clemson 38-35, but turned around and beat South Carolina 41-30 at home. After handling North Texas 45-21 they had another close one, beating LSU 44-41 at home.

The Bulldogs went into a slump without Todd Gurley, edging Tennessee in overtime before losing 41-26 to Missouri and 31-27 at Vanderbilt. Gurley returned to help them beat Florida 23-20 and the Bulldogs cruised from there—except for the Auburn game. Georgia fell victim to Malzahn Miracle #1, the needlessly-deflected touchdown pass that won the game for the Tigers. They lost Aaron Murray in the Kentucky game and needed double overtime but managed to beat Georgia Tech 41-34.

Nebraska's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (2)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Wyoming  W 37-34
   
2. Southern Miss  W 56-13
   
3. #17 UCLA  L 21-41
   
4. South Dakota St  W 59-20
   
5. Illinois  W 39-19
   
6. @ Purdue  W 44- 7
   
7. @ Minnesota  L 23-34
   
8. Northwestern  W 27-24
   
9. @ Michigan  W 17-13
   
10. #5 Michigan St  L 28-41
    
11. @ Penn State  W 23-20 OT
    
12. Iowa  L 17-38

Nebraska didn't beat a bowl-bound team until 2/3 of the season was over. They only edged 5-7 Wyoming 37-34, and beat 1-11 Southern Miss 56-13. They lost 41-21 at home to UCLA after leading 21-3.

They won three more but fell 34-23 at Minnesota. The Cornhuskers beat Northwestern on a hail Mary, 27-24, and then won at Michigan 17-13. They couldn't beat Michigan State, however, losing 41-28. Another nail-biter followed in the Penn State overtime win, but the season ended with a thud in the 38-17 home loss to Iowa.

Key Injuries

The key injury is obviously Aaron Murray for Georgia. Nebraska quarterback Taylor Martinez is out, too, but he's been gone since the early part of the season. Georgia had only one game during which to get used to Murray's absence—the first time they've played without him in four years.

The Bulldogs are also missing a few defensive players due to suspension including starting safety Josh Harvey-Clemons.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Georgia's season: -3 wins; Nebraska's season: -2 wins
• Georgia's momentum: +0 wins; Nebraska's momentum: -1 win
• Georgia won final game: YES; Nebraska won final game: NO
• Georgia glad to be there? no; Nebraska glad to be there: no
• Georgia time zones from home: 0; Nebraska time zones from home: 1;
• Georgia coaching situation: stable; Nebraska coaching situation: unstable

These teams met last year in a bowl game—but both teams had better seasons last year so they met in the Capital One Bowl, both having won their divisions and lost in their conference championship game. This time around neither team made it that far. Georgia, especially, had bigger plans for the season and this bowl has to be a disappointment. But at least they won their final game, while Nebraska got it's butt kicked at home by Iowa. Neither team is exactly flying high right now. Mark Richt's job is pretty safe but Bo Pelini almost crossed the line with his sideline antics against the Hawkeyes, and the unstable designation is as much for him as his job status.

Final analysis

Both of these teams have had several close calls, either winning or losing. Georgia went back and forth between winning the tight games and losing them. They beat LSU, Tennessee, Florida, and Georgia Tech in close contests but the one that everyone will remember is the loss to Auburn due to the Immaculate Deflection. Nebraska didn't lose close games, and they won four of them, and until Auburn-Georgia the craziest ending of the year might have been Ron Kellogg's hail Mary that beat Northwestern.

Georgia won last year's contest 45-31, but that was a much better Georgia team. Of course, that was a much better Nebraska team, too. There's a chance that Nebraska will get some revenge-factor motivation going that Georgia can't feel, but both teams should be reasonably pumped up for a match between two great programs.

Georgia is still the better team, but the big question is at quarterback. How will they do without Aaron Murray? Well, we can see from the team's performance against Georgia Tech that they'll be okay. Georgia might have been nearly a touchdown worse on offense with Mason in place of Murray. But Nebraska has been at least a field goal worse without Martinez. So even if we go by our projections above and dock Georgia 3-4 points, they're still in the clear.

The main reason Georgia shouldn't be too worried as that Nebraska's rushing defense is not that good, and the Bulldogs have Todd Gurley back. They don't have to play to Nebraska's defensive strength and throw the ball. They have a balanced offense and they can attack where they want, and it just so happens that their interests line up against the Cornhuskers. Mason started a game already and won it, so he's not green anymore.

The only real worry for Georgia is Nebraska's luck at winning close games. Without Murray the game could be close, and that's been a great situation for the Cornhuskers, while Georgia has lost its two most high-profile tight games to Clemson and Auburn. On the other hand, the Bulldogs won four tight games, including LSU and most recently Georgia Tech—with Mason at QB.

Bottom line, though, Nebraska hasn't defeated a really good team this year, with narrow wins over Michigan and Penn State. Those are also traditional powers having down years. But Georgia isn't that far down, and though it should be close, the Bulldogs should repeat as winners in this series.

Prediction:  Georgia 34, Nebraska 30

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Chick-Fil-A Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Duke (10-3) vs. Texas A&M (8-4)

Tuesday, December 31: Chick-Fil-A Bowl in Atlanta, GA at 8:00 pm EST

#24 Duke Blue Devils (10-3) vs. #21 Texas A&M Aggies (8-4)

The Blue Devils face the Aggies in Johnny Manziel's last collegiate game.

Vegas line/spread: Texas A&M by 12 (over/under 74)

The early line was 11 1/2, and now some places are quoting 13. The bottom line is that the Aggies are a substantial favorite.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Duke	31%	53%
Texas A&M	69%	47%

Using our game-comparison system this matchup makes for an interesting case study. Texas A&M's offensive and defensive performances are so disparate that it makes a difference whether you look at performance game-by-game or component-by-component. Looking at game performance quality alone, the Aggies are a 78% favorite to win. But cross-combining offense and defensive performances creates more opportunities for Duke to finish ahead, and the Aggies are just 69% favorites. Against the spread, Duke wins the majority.

Strength power rating:   Texas A&M 43, Duke 33     by Median rating:  Texas A&M 43-33
Duke scoring offense: #42 vs. Texas A&M scoring defense: #72
Duke scoring defense: #56 vs. Texas A&M scoring offense: #6

Texas A&M ranks #17 in the Strength power rating and Duke just #47, hence the 10-point predicted margin of victory. The Blue Devils aren't terrible on offense or defense, they just aren't very good at either. Conversely the Aggies are incredible on offense and basically piss-poor on defense. It should make for a high-scoring game, maybe a shootout—which both teams have seen plenty of this year.

Yardage analysis:   Texas A&M 52, Duke 35     per-play:   Texas A&M 48, Duke 32
Yardage differential: Duke #71 vs. Texas A&M #25
Duke total offense: #54 vs. Texas A&M total defense: #87
Duke total defense: #83 vs. Texas A&M total offense: #3

It's the same basic story by yardage only the spread is wider. By this projection, Texas A&M racks up nearly 600 yards of offense and wins the total offense battle by over 100 yards, with the two teams combining for over 1,000 yards. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Texas A&M 54, Duke 43

• Interceptions: Both teams are vulnerable and the defenses are good at picking off passes; based on total pass defenses (breakups + picks) Duke has a slight expected edge of about a point.
• Forced fumbles: Don't expect too many forced fumbles from these teams, but Duke has about a 1 1/2 point edge here as the Aggies rarely cause fumbles.
• Sacks: The expectation is for a low sack total in the game, maybe 2-1 Duke. The Blue Devils get another 1 1/2 points or so.
• Red zone%: Duke's red zone play is quite competent, and Texas A&M's red zone defense is poor. This adds nearly 4 points to Duke's score and just 1/2 point to A&M.
• 3rd-down%: Finally a category that the Aggies win, by about 3 1/2 points.
• Special Teams: Duke's special teams rank #19 and A&M's are #49, a 1 1/2 point difference.

Summary: Non-scrimmage considerations whittle down the 17-point yardage estimate to 11 points, falling somewhere between the Strength power rating's 10-point estimate and the betting public's 12+ points.

When Duke has the ball

Duke rushing offense: #45

Texas A&M rushing defense: #80

Jela Duncan and Josh Snead combined for over 1,000 yards this year, and QB Brandon Connette rushed for 13 touchdowns. They aren't explosive on the ground but Texas A&M rush defense isn't impenetrable by any means. The Blue Devils could have around 200 yards on the ground, a bit less if Duncan doesn't play (see Key Injuries).

Duke passing offense: #61	Texas A&M passing defense: #95   per att: #63
Duke interceptions thrown ranking: #104	Texas A&M interceptions picked ranking: #16
Duke quarterback protection rank: #23	Texas A&M pass rush rank: #79

Duke used two quarterbacks extensively this year, Anthony Boone (1,833 yards, 10 TDs, 11 int) and Brandon Connette (1,212 yards, 13 TDs, 6 int). Both will probably play in the bowl game. Top target Jamison Crowder had 1,197 receiving yards and 7 TDs in 97 receptions. Again, they're not the best passing team but against Texas A&M you don't have to be; look for Duke's QBs to total around 260 yards.

The problem area for Duke is interceptions, with the QBs having 17 between them at about the same clip. A&M has 15 picks as a team with no individual having more than 3. Duke's protection is pretty decent and A&M doesn't sack the quarterback that often, so avoiding turnovers is the Blue Devils' main task.

When Texas A&M has the ball

Texas A&M rushing offense: #33

Duke rushing defense: #77

Johnny Manziel led the team in rushing again but not like he did last year, having just 686 yards compared to last year's 1,400+, and 8 TDs instead of 21. Ben Malena's total also dropped from over 800 to just 506. Duke doesn't have a strong rushing defense and the Aggies should surpass 200 yards.

Texas A&M passing offense: #7	Duke passing defense: #90   per att: #73
Texas A&M interceptions thrown ranking: #73	Duke interceptions picked ranking: #14
Texas A&M quarterback protection rank: #52	Duke pass rush rank: #77

Manziel did surpass last year's passing total already, with 3,732 yards and 33 touchdowns (vs. 26 TDs last season). He also threw more picks (13 vs. 9) while maintaining his completion percentage (69% vs 68% last year). Mike Evans also had a better year with 1,322 receiving yards and 12 TDs, and three others (Derel Walker, Malcome Kennedy, and Travis Labhart) topped 500 yards. Given Duke's poor pass defense look for around 350+ yards from Manziel.

Manziel has been more interception-prone this year, and often in the red zone it seems. Duke could take advantage of that as they have five players with multiple picks this year. The Duke pass rush isn't that fearsome but does feature Kenny Anunike who has 6 sacks on the year.

 

Duke's season (10-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (5)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (3) to losing teams (0)

1. NC Central  W 45- 0
   
2. @ Memphis  W 28-14
   
3. Georgia Tech  L 14-38
   
4. Pittsburgh  L 55-58
   
5. Troy  W 38-31
   
6. Navy  W 35- 7
   
7. @ Virginia  W 35-22
   
8. @ Virginia Tech  W 13-10
   
9. North Carolina St  W 38-20
   
10. Miami FL  W 48-30
    
11. @ Wake Forest  W 28-21
    
12. @ North Carolina  W 27-25
    
13. #1 Florida St  L  7-45

Duke didn't look like it was doing anything special after five games. Two easy wins over NC Central (45-0) and Memphis (28-14) didn't impress, and certainly losses to Georgia Tech (38-14) and Pitt in a 58-55 shootout didn't either. Nor did beating Troy by a touchdown.

The 35-7 Navy win might have been their best overall game but it wasn't until the 13-10 road win over Virginia Tech put Duke at 6-2 that people really started paying attention. But the time they'd beaten a deflated Miami team 48-30, they were in contention for the conference title and they got there at 10-2.

No one really thought they had a chance against a motivated Florida State team, so the 45-7 loss can be discounted along with any "letdown" they have at not making the Orange Bowl. The 10-win season—the first in Duke's history—looms larger than any defeat.

Texas A&M's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Rice  W 52-31
   
2. Sam Houston St  W 65-28
   
3. #3 Alabama  L 42-49
   
4. SMU  W 42-13
   
5. @ Arkansas  W 45-33
   
6. @ Mississippi  W 41-38
   
7. #2 Auburn  L 41-45
   
8. Vanderbilt  W 56-24
   
9. UTEP  W 57- 7
   
10. Mississippi St  W 51-41
    
11. @ #16 LSU  L 10-34
    
12. @ #8 Missouri  L 21-28

As much as this season was somewhat of a disappointment, you have to look at what could have been. Three Aggie losses were very close games against top ten foes: they fell to Alabama 49-42, Auburn 45-41, and Missouri 28-21. The only convincing loss was at LSU, 34-10.

The opening win vs. Rice, 52-31, looks a lot better now that the Owls are 10-3 C-USA champs. The Aggies put up 52, 41, 56, and 51 against four bowl-bound teams, but due to the porous defense they gave up 31, 38, 24, and 41 and made those contests fairly close. Thus Texas A&M got into lots of shootouts, losing those with Alabama and Auburn but winning the ones with Mississippi (41-38) and Mississippi State (51-41). Is another with Duke on its way?

Key Injuries

Duke has some concerns, mainly that quarterback Brandon Connette might miss the game; he was listed as questionable but has been upgraded to probable. But leading rusher Jela Duncan is reportedly out for the game due to academic suspension. Also, four-year starting offensive lineman Perry Simmons tore his ACL vs. FSU and will miss the game. And d-back Dwayne Norman is being held out the first half due to a suspension. For the Aggies, starting linebacker Darian Claiborne is suspended.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Duke's season: +4 wins; Texas A&M's season: -2 wins
• Duke's momentum: +2 wins; Texas A&M's momentum: -2 wins
• Duke won final game: NO; Texas A&M won final game: NO
• Duke glad to be there? yes; Texas A&M glad to be there: maybe
• Duke time zones from home: 0; Texas A&M time zones from home: 1;
• Duke coaching situation: stable; Texas A&M coaching situation: stable

The good news for both teams is, as of this writing, no one's hired away their head coaches.

Duke's 10-2 regular season, up from 6-6, is a landmark for the program. Heck, their 8-game winning streak consisted of more wins than they'd had in a season since 1994. So this has been a banner year for Duke while Texas A&M lost a number of close games and couldn't keep last year's momentum going. Duke has more positive momentum going into the game, and they've got the added motivation of seeking their first bowl victory since 1961.

Final analysis

We'll keep this one short and simple: It's hard to see Duke beating Texas A&M but they have a lot more motivation going in. For Texas A&M, is Johnny Manziel focused on going out with a bang or on the NFL?

Manziel will be his usual self against Duke, running and passing with abandon against a poor defense. His bad performances against LSU and Missouri were due to facing good defenses, which he won't see here. But he'll also make some mistakes like critical turnovers that will keep Duke in the game and make it another Manziel shootout.

Manziel lost the shootouts to the top-tier teams (Alabama, Auburn) this year and won the shootouts against the just-good teams (the Mississippis) and Duke is in the latter category. It took Northwestern several tries and many close losses before they could get the half-century-bowl-win-drought monkey off their backs so it probably will take Duke a few more attempts.

But the Blue Devils won't let this one get out of hand like they did against FSU, since that team had a good defense than A&M doesn't have. Duke will probably lose, but they might at least go out with guns blazing and maybe with a chance to win at the end.

Prediction:  Texas A&M 47, Duke 39

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Liberty Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Rice (10-3) vs. Mississippi State (6-6)

Tuesday, December 31: Liberty Bowl in Memphis, TN at 4:00 pm EST

Rice Owls (10-3) vs. Mississippi State Bulldogs (6-6)

The 10-win Owls face the 6-win Bulldogs in Memphis.

Vegas line/spread: Mississippi State by 7 (over/under 50.5)

Despite the records, Mississippi State is a full touchdown favorite with the oddsmakers.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Rice	31%	46%
Miss St	69%	54%

Mississippi State lost 6 games but played a much tougher schedule than Rice, and they win almost 7 of 10 game comparisons against the Owls, and over 50% vs. the spread. The Bulldogs rank #45 in the Strength power rating to #72 for Rice.

Strength power rating:   Mississippi State 26, Rice 18     by Median rating:  Miss St 26-17
Rice scoring offense: #90 vs. Miss St scoring defense: #21
Rice scoring defense: #61 vs. Miss St scoring offense: #75

Rice's defense may be a match for Mississippi State's weak offense, but Rice's offense is even weaker and the Bulldogs have a top 25 scoring defense after adjusting for their tough SEC schedule. This makes Mississippi State an 8-point favorite according to the Strength power rating.

Yardage analysis:   Mississippi State 28, Rice 17     per-play:   Mississippi State 34-16
Yardage differential: Rice #62 vs. Miss St #29
Rice total offense: #79 vs. Miss St total defense: #19
Rice total defense: #48 vs. Miss St total offense: #42

By yardage, Mississippi State's offense looks a bit better than it does on the scoreboard, and if the yardage estimates come true they will outgain the Owls by about 100 yards, resulting in a projected 11 to 12 point win. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Mississippi State 24, Rice 15

• Interceptions: Mississippi State throws quite a few picks and intercepts a lot, too. Based on total pass defenses (breakups and interceptions), though, Rice has an edge of about a point here.
• Forced fumbles: The Bulldogs get back about half a point here in expected score.
• Sacks: Mississippi State will probably have one more sack than Rice, worth just over 2 points.
• Red zone%: Both teams should have decent red zone success, Rice a bit more than Mississippi State. We give Rice an extra point and the Bulldogs a scrap or two.
• 3rd-down%: Conversely, neither team should have a lot of success on third down. Both teams have bad 3rd down conversion rates and good defenses on 3rd down. We dock Rice almost three points and Mississippi State almost 2.
• Special Teams: Rice has good special teams, worth 1.4 points. Mississippi State on the other hand ranks #121 in the nation in ESPN's advanced stats. The Bulldogs rank #124 in punt return average and #123 in field goal percentage, for example. We dock them almost 2.7 points.

Summary: Overall Rice narrow the spread just a bit, from 11 to 9 points, while overall scoring goes down a bit too.

When Rice has the ball

Rice rushing offense: #28

Miss St rushing defense: #27

Rice has a decent rushing game led by Charles Ross' 1,252 yards. QB Taylor McHargue nets 466 for the Owls. Mississippi State's defense makes a good test for the Rice offense, who should see around 170 yards.

Rice passing offense: #107	Miss St passing defense: #26   per att: #11
Rice interceptions thrown ranking: #19	Miss St interceptions picked ranking: #7
Rice quarterback protection rank: #108	Miss St pass rush rank: #85

Taylor McHargue isn't a terrible passer but he isn't terribly prolific either. He completed just 52% this year for 2,261 yards and 17 TDs vs. 8 interceptions. Jordan Taylor is the top target with 846 yards. Mississippi State's pass defense is like their rushing defense, almost top 25, and, on a per-attempt basis, almost top ten. Rice might have fewer than 150 passing yards.

Mississippi State's defense is a threat to intercept passes, too, led by Nickoe Whitley who has 5 picks Whitley is out for the year, however, and Rice doesn't throw very much and that keeps the interceptions down, but not the sacks: McHargue has hit the turf 29 times this year. Luckily for them the Bulldogs don't have a great pass rush.

When Mississippi State has the ball

Miss St rushing offense: #38

Rice rushing defense: #69

QB Dak Prescott ended up #1 ahead of the team's running back committee with 751 yards and 11 touchdowns. Rice has a very average rushing defense and could give up around 200 yards.

Miss St passing offense: #62	Rice passing defense: #28   per att: #79
Miss St interceptions thrown ranking: #70	Rice interceptions picked ranking: #66
Miss St quarterback protection rank: #59	Rice pass rush rank: #102

Prescott threw for just 1,657 yards, 7 touchdowns, and 7 picks this year as last year's starter Tyler Russell (875 yards, 5:3) also saw quite a bit of time while battling injuries; he's expected to miss the game. Jameon Lewis was top dog among the receivers with 703 yards and 5 TDs. Rice's pass defense ranks almost in the top 25 and could hold the Bulldogs to just over 200 yards.

Rice's per-attempt ranking of #79, however, suggests Mississippi State could have better success. The Owls don't intercept more than an average amount of passes, and their pass rush is pretty weak. So the Bulldogs might have better-than-expected fortune passing if they want/need to pass more.

 

Rice's season (10-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. @ #21 Texas A&M  L 31-52
   
2. Kansas  W 23-14
   
3. = Houston  L 26-31
   
4. Florida Atlantic  L 18-14
   
5. @ Tulsa  W 30-27 OT
   
6. @ Texas-San Antonio  W 27-21
   
7. @ New Mexico St  W 45-19
   
8. UTEP  W 45- 7
   
9. @ North Texas  L 16-28
   
10. Louisiana Tech  W 52-14
    
11. @ UAB W 37-34 OT
    
12. Tulane  W 17-13
    
13. Marshall  W 41-24

Rice was not expected to challenge Texas A&M and they didn't, losing 52-31, but they had trouble with Kansas before winning 23-14 and lost to Houston (31-26) and FAU (18-14) and were just 1-3 to start the year.

Luckily they beat Tulsa on the road 30-27 in overtime, then edged UTSA 27-21. Two more wins later and they were knocking on bowl eligibility. Though the Owls fell to North Texas, they continued winning and eventually beat Marshall for the C-USA crown. That was their most impressive win in an otherwise unaccomplished year, as Tulane is the only other bowl-bound team they beat.

Mississippi State's season (6-6)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (6) to losing teams (0)

1. = #13 Oklahoma St  L 3-21
   
2. Alcorn St  W 51- 7
   
3. @ #2 Auburn  L 20-24
   
4. Troy  W 62- 7
   
5. #16 LSU  L 26-59
   
6. Bowling Green  W 21-20
   
7. Kentucky  W 28-22
   
8. @ #9 South Carolina  L 16-34
   
9. @ #21 Texas A&M  L 41-51
   
10. #3 Alabama  L 7-20
    
11. @ Arkansas  W 24-17 OT
    
12. Mississippi  W 17-10 OT

Mississippi State only convincingly beat two teams this season: Alcorn State 51-7, and Troy 62-7. Troy was bowl-eligible but not chosen. They other bowl teams they beat were Bowling Green 21-20 and Ole Miss, 17-10 in overtime. They barely beat 2-10 Kentucky 28-22 and beat 3-9 Arkansas in overtime.

On the flip side, every team the Bulldogs lost to finished in the BCS top 25. They fell to #13 Oklahoma State 21-3; to #2 Auburn on the road, 24-20, to #16 LSU 59-26, to #9 South Carolina 34-16, to #21 Texas A&M 51-41, and to #3 Alabama 20-7. They had one offensive meltdown—Oklahoma State—and one on defense—LSU.

Probably the team most comparable to Rice on their schedule is Bowling Green, who won the MAC title. The Falcons are probably better than the Owls but the Bulldogs won that game at home by just a point.

Key Injuries

Mississippi State has quarterback issues. Tyler Russell, who has been hurt on and off all year and thus ended up 2nd in passing yards, had shoulder surgery and won't play in the bowl game. Dak Prescott started the majority of the year and should be healthy for the bowl game. The Bulldogs are also missing their interceptions leader, d-back Nickoe Whitley, and two other defenders are questionable. Rice isn't missing any of their top players.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Rice's season: +3 wins; Miss St's season: -2 wins
• Rice's momentum: +1 win; Miss St's momentum: +0 wins
• Rice won final game: YES; Miss St won final game: YES
• Rice glad to be there? yes; Miss St glad to be there: yes
• Rice time zones from home: 0; Miss St time zones from home: 0;
• Rice coaching situation: stable; Miss St coaching situation: stable?

Rice had a great season, going from 6-6 to 9-3 plus a conference title game win. Mississippi State cooled from 8-4 to 6-6 and had to sweat out bowl eligibility. But that final win against Ole Miss probably also cooled Dan Mullen's hot seat talk for the time being. Both teams ended with big wins and both are glad to be going bowling.

It's possible that Mississippi State should be given partial home field advantage for playing in Memphis; it's pretty certain that they'll have a decided advantage in the fan base at the game.

Final analysis

It's hard to pick a game between a team that has won a lot of games due to an easy schedule and one who has lost a lot of games due to a tough one. The former hasn't had much opportunity to really prove itself and the latter can't be blamed for losing to the teams that beat it.

In this case Mississippi State hasn't lost to any team but some of the very best, and that wouldn't include Rice. But they haven't shown that they can dominate a decent team like Rice. The Owls beat Marshall, a team probably about as good as Mississippi State, while the Bulldogs beat Bowling Green, a team probably quite a bit better than Rice. They only won that game by a point, and beat another similar-level team, Arkansas, in overtime.

Given Mississippi State's quarterback issues and defensive players out, we see a pretty close game that could go either way. We'll give it to the Bulldogs as the more battle-hardened team, beating the C-USA champs by the same score they beat the MAC champs.

Prediction:  Mississippi State 21, Rice 20

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Sun Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: UCLA (9-3) vs. Virginia Tech (7-5)

Tuesday, December 31: Sun Bowl in El Paso, TX at 2:00 pm EST

#17 UCLA Bruins (9-3) vs. Virginia Tech Hokies (8-4)

A solid Pac-12 vs. ACC showdown in El Paso.

Vegas line/spread: UCLA by 7 (over/under 50 1/2)

Yet another Pac-12 team is favored to win by a touchdown or more.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
UCLA	78%	63%
Va Tech	22%	37%

UCLA is 14th in the Strength power rating and Virginia Tech is just #41; not surprisingly, the game comparisons favor the Bruins a large percentage of the time, even against the spread.

Strength power rating:   UCLA 27, Va Tech 14     by Median rating:  UCLA 28-12
UCLA scoring offense: #16 vs. Va Tech scoring defense: #6
UCLA scoring defense: #15 vs. Va Tech scoring offense: #110

Our power rating suggests a 13-point spread, and perhaps more interesting, a very low score. This is because the defenses both rank in the top 15. Virginia Tech's #6 defense should keep UCLA's #16 offense in check, while the Hokies' #110 offense will have trouble scoring on UCLA's #15 defense. Note that Virginia Tech's #110 offensive ranking is among all teams of all divisions; they rank #91 out of the 125 Division I-A (FBS) teams.

Yardage analysis:   UCLA 18, Va Tech 14     per-play:   UCLA 24, Va Tech 13
Yardage differential: UCLA #13 vs. Va Tech #28
UCLA total offense: #25 vs. Va Tech total defense: #2
UCLA total defense: #17 vs. Va Tech total offense: #92

Some teams don't convert their yardage into points very well, and Virginia Tech is one of those teams. Based on adjusted yardage differential they're the #28 team in the nation rather than #41. It's actually their defense that is better on a yardage basis, #2 in the nation. By this scenario UCLA outgains the Hokies by less than 50 yards, and wins by 4 or 5 points. 

The per-play figures suggest Virginia Tech might average just 2.2 yards per carry, and the score margin is back up in double digits.

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   UCLA 21, Va Tech 6

• Interceptions: Virginia Tech gets a small advantage here, about 1/2 point, as their defense is pretty good at getting interceptions.
• Forced fumbles: UCLA has an expected 1 point edge here as they are good at forcing fumbles, but neither team coughs it up a lot.
• Sacks: The Hokies have a great pass rush, #2 in the nation, and UCLA's protection is questionable. They might have around 4 sacks, but UCLA might have about 3 themselves. Virginia Tech's advantage is just over 2 points.
• Red zone%: UCLA has a solid advantage here; they're #9 in red zone offense while the Hokies are #84. The Bruins add an expected 1.7 points and the Hokies lose 0.7.
• 3rd-down%: Another big "win" for UCLA as they are #2 (adjusted) in 3rd down conversions while Virginia Tech is #111. Both teams are good on 3rd down defense, so UCLA won't convert much more than normal (we give them less than a point) but Virginia Tech loses almost 5 points.
• Special Teams: Shockingly, Virginia Tech's special teams are very poor this year, rankings #110 in the nation, while UCLA is stellar at #6. Special teams is what Virginia Tech often needs to win games, but this season they are especially bad at punt returns and placekicking. This is almost another 5 point swing for UCLA

Summary: Virginia takes a hit on red zone, third down, and surprisingly, special teams play, going from a 4-point underdog based on scrimmage play to a 15-point underdog with all things considered. This is fairly similar to the Strength power rating's 13-point estimate.

When UCLA has the ball

UCLA rushing offense: #34

Va Tech rushing defense: #8

The Bruins didn't have a mega-back like Jonathan Franklin this year but between QB Brett Hundley and RBs Paul Perkins and Jordan James they accounted for well over 1,500 yards (over 500 apiece). Virginia Tech's rushing defense is very good, however, and should hold the Bruins to less than 150.

UCLA passing offense: #31	Va Tech passing defense: #1   per att: #7
UCLA interceptions thrown ranking: #46	Va Tech interceptions picked ranking: #4
UCLA quarterback protection rank: #100	Va Tech pass rush rank: #2

Hundley didn't match his freshman year stats, with 2,845 yards and 22 TDs. Shaq Evans also fell short with 617 yards this year while 5 others had 200+. Still, UCLA faced tough pass defenses in general and nearly had a top 25 passing attack when adjusted for this.

Virginia Tech's pass defense finished the regular season #1 in the nation in pass defense. Based on the averages we think they'll hold UCLA to around 200 passing yards. What's more, they could come up with a lot of big plays to further reduce the passing game's effectiveness. The Hokies have 19 interceptions on the year; Kendall Fuller has 6, and Brandon Facyson 5. Hundley has thrown just 9 picks, but he's been sacked 33 times. Virginia Tech's defense is #2 in adjusted sacks and has 37 so far, with three players who have 5+. Nothing is going to be easy for Hundley against the Hokies, a big reason why the numbers all suggest a low score.

When Virginia Tech has the ball

Va Tech rushing offense: #99

UCLA rushing defense: #31

The days of juggling 1,000 yard rushers are over at Virginia Tech; this year Trey Edmunds led with 675 (10 TDs) and the team barely made the top 100 in the nation. UCLA's rushing defense is good enough to hold the Hokies under 100 yards.

Note that UCLA's rushing defense has a huge correction, from #72 in raw average to #31, due to their opponents. They played Nebraska, Stanford, Oregon, Arizona, and Washington, all top 25 in raw rushing yards, and held most of them well under their averages.

Va Tech passing offense: #59	UCLA passing defense: #20   per att: #19
Va Tech interceptions thrown ranking: #77	UCLA interceptions picked ranking: #57
Va Tech quarterback protection rank: #84	UCLA pass rush rank: #32

Once again Logan Thomas failed to consistently live up to his potential (hype?) as a great quarterback; he threw for almost 3,000 yards and 16 touchdowns but had 13 picks and completed just 57%. Three receivers, Willie Byrn, Demitri Knowles, and Joshua Stanford, had over 600 yards each but just 6 TDs between them. UCLA's passing defense (#45 raw, #20 after correction) should hold them to around 200 yards.

UCLA might be able to take advantage of Thomas' interception problem to some extend, but pressure might be a better route as the Bruins have 28 sacks on the year (senior linebacker Anthony Barr leads with 10) while Thomas has been sacked 29 times.

 

UCLA's season (9-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Nevada  W 58-20
   
2. @ Nebraska  W 41-21
   
3. New Mexico St  W 59-13
   
4. @ Utah  W 34-27
   
5. California  W 37-10
   
6. @ #1 Stanford  L 10-24
   
7. @ #10 Oregon  L 14-42
   
8. Colorado  W 45-23
   
9. @ Arizona  W 31-26
   
10. Washington  W 41-31
    
11. #14 Arizona St  L 33-38
    
12. @ Southern Cal  W 35-14

UCLA's early schedule was easy—they beat  Nevada (58-20), New Mexico State (59-13), Utah (34-27), and Cal (37-10), with the 41-21 win at Nebraska the only game against a bowl team. So it's not too shocking that when they faced Stanford they were manhandled 24-10, and that Oregon did it worse, 42-14.

After a rebound over Colorado (45-23) the Bruins were able to nip Arizona, 31-26, and edge past Washington 41-31, but they lost a close one to ASU 38-33. UCLA finished strong with a solid 35-14 win at USC for a 9-3 record. Note that the three teams that beat them all finished in the top 15 of the BCS rankings.

Virginia Tech's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. = #3 Alabama  L 10-35
   
2. Western Carolina  W 45- 3
   
3. @ East Carolina  W 15-10
   
4. Marshall  W 29-21 3OT
   
5. @ Georgia Tech  W 17-10
   
6. North Carolina  W 27-17
   
7. Pittsburgh  W 19- 9
   
8. #24 Duke  L 10-13
   
9. @ Boston College  L 27-34
   
10. @ Miami FL  W 42-24
    
11. Maryland  L 21-24 OT
    
12. @ Virginia  W 16- 6

Looking at the scores, and the charts to the lower left, it's pretty clear that once again it was defense that won games for the Hokies. The offense in many cases did the minimum it needed to in order to win. Only in the 42-24 win at Miami was it even close, as the offense played its best there. The 34-27 Boston College loss could be called the fault of the defense, but just barely.

The Hokies lost to Alabama right off the bat, 35-10, but that was almost encouraging, and six wins later they were 6-1, and five of their wins were over future bowl teams. All were close; they nipped East Carolina 15-10, beat Marshall in triple overtime, beat Georgia Tech 17-10, and topped UNC and Pitt by 10 points each. At the time it was shocking they lost to Duke 13-10 but the Blue Devils won the Coastal division. The losses to BC and Maryland (24-21 OT) further dampened the season but they finished 8-4 after beating Virginia 16-6.

Key Injuries

UCLA's offensive line, already facing the daunting prospect of Virginia Tech's pass rush, will likely be missing starter Simon Goines. The Bruin defense will also be without top tackler LB Eric Kendricks. Virginia Tech has some questionable players but no big contributors.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• UCLA's season: +0 wins; Va Tech's season: +2 wins
• UCLA's momentum: -1 win; Va Tech's momentum: -2 wins
• UCLA won final game: YES; Va Tech won final game: YES
• UCLA glad to be there? maybe; Va Tech glad to be there: probably
• UCLA time zones from home: 1; Va Tech time zones from home: 2;
• UCLA coaching situation: stable; Va Tech coaching situation: stable

Who wants to go to El Paso? Last year USC sure didn't, and Georgia Tech whipped them. This year UCLA might be a little less than enthusiastic, but nothing compared to last year's Trojans. Virginia Tech gained a couple of wins over last year, but saw a much more promising season end in a 2nd tier bowl, similar to what the Bruins saw happen to their year.

Both teams righted the ship with a win in rivalry week; for UCLA it might have been their best win of the year.

Final analysis

We see a low score for this game because Virginia Tech isn't good on offense, and UCLA is up against a great Hokie defense.

Virginia Tech's defense is more than a match for UCLA's running game. And on the passing side they rank #1 against the pass and are in the top five in interceptions and sacks. Brett Hundley might have a long day.

The Hokies might not score enough themselves to win the game, though. They can't really run the ball, and don't pass well enough to make up the difference. And UCLA's defense is good at both. The Bruins have faced some of the best running and passing teams in the nation this year in the Pac-12; now they just have to defense a team that can't do either very well.

And this year Virginia Tech's special teams can't bail them out. Unlike most years, it isn't a great year for Beamer-ball (other than the defensive emphasis; that's still fully intact).

What clinches things for the Bruins is the fact that the teams that beat them are all in the top 15 in the BCS. Virginia Tech is nowhere near that level. That's not to say they can't keep it close, though, especially in a low scoring game, and we're going very, very low. (Update: we added a bit with UCLA's #1 tackler out, but kept UCLA the winner. Still going very low, just not quite as low).

Prediction:  UCLA 13, Virginia Tech 10

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Independence Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Arizona (7-5) vs. Boston College (7-5)

Tuesday, December 31: Independence Bowl in Shreveport, LA at 12:30 pm EST

Arizona Wildcats (7-5) vs. Boston College Eagles (7-5)

Let's cut to the chase: this game is interesting only because of the running back matchup at the heart of the offenses: KaDeem Carey vs. Andre Williams.

Vegas line/spread: Arizona by 7 1/2 (over/under 47)

The Pac-12 teams are pretty big favorites this bowl season; the conference really should try to renegotiate their bowl pairings...

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Arizona	74%	60%
Boston College	26%	40%

The oddsmakers' line is more than fair to Boston College, though. We have Arizona a big favorite even by the spread, as the Wildcats rank #21 and B.C. just #60 in the Strength power rating.

Strength power rating:   Arizona 35, Boston College 23     by Median rating:  Arizona 34-24
Arizona scoring offense: #28 vs. Boston College scoring defense: #68
Arizona scoring defense: #20 vs. Boston College scoring offense: #51

The Wildcats are closer to a 13-point favorite but rounding the scores makes it 35-23 per the Strength power rating. Arizona outclasses the Eagles on both offense and defense in terms of putting points on the board (or stopping their opponent from doing so).

Yardage analysis:   Arizona 42, Boston College 20     per-play:   Arizona 34, Boston College 34
Yardage differential: Arizona #14 vs. Boston College #80
Arizona total offense: #18 vs. Boston College total defense: #76
Arizona total defense: #27 vs. Boston College total offense: #72

Looking at scrimmage yardage only, Arizona extends their margin to a whopping 22 points as Boston College's ratings drop into the 70s on both offense and defense. By this estimate Arizona will outgain the Eagles by over 150 yards, topping 500 yards of total offense themselves.

But just when everything was pointing to an Arizona win or blowout, the per-play yardage projection calls for a too-close-to-call game. Boston College ranks #8 in adjusted yards per carry, and that puts them even with the Wildcats assuming equal number of plays and a 50/50 run/pass split. However, Boston College is #124 in number of plays from scrimmage. Maybe they should run a hurry-up offense?

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Arizona 49, Boston College 21

• Interceptions: Boston College doesn't throw interceptions, so they have a slight edge here, less than a point.
• Forced fumbles: Again, not much here; turnovers aren't expected to be a factor in this game (but they're very unpredictable). BC gets nearly 3 points here just for holding onto the ball so well.
• Sacks: Sacks fall Boston College's way, too. Arizona will probably have just one, giving BC another 1 1/2 points.
• Red zone%: Here's where Arizona reasserts itself in a big way; they are #20 in red zone offense while Boston College is #106. This gives Arizona 3 1/2 points and docks BC almost 3 points.
• 3rd-down%: The Wildcats are also far better on 3rd downs, on both offense and defense. We give Arizona another 3 1/2 points and dock BC another 2.
• Special Teams: Neither team excels in overall special teams, with Boston College at #72 and Arizona at #94. This gives the Eagles nearly a point.

Summary: Red zone play and expected 3rd-down conversion rate help Arizona extend their projected advantage to four touchdowns, pulling far away from the Vegas and Strength-based estimates.

When Arizona has the ball

Arizona rushing offense: #8

Boston College rushing defense: #38

In this corner: Ka'Deem Carey of Arizona, with 1,716 yards and 17 touchdowns, 156 yards per game, 5.33 yards per carry. High game(s): 232 vs. Utah, 206 vs. Oregon. Low(s): 119 vs. Colorado. Team yardage adjustment factor: 1.08 (that is, Arizona faced good rushing defenses on average).

Carey's best asset is consistency. Not only did he rush for at least 100 yards in every game this season, he led the nation in rushing last year, too. BC's rushing defense isn't bad but Arizona should have around 250 yards on the ground, as Carey isn't the only threat: QB BJ Denker has 898 yards (12 TDs) on the season.

Arizona passing offense: #83	Boston College passing defense: #114   per att: #99
Arizona interceptions thrown ranking: #34	Boston College interceptions picked ranking: #105
Arizona quarterback protection rank: #19	Boston College pass rush rank: #18

BJ Denker is more of a running quarterback but he did throw for 2,241 yards and 14 touchdowns. Nate Phillips leads the receivers with 503 yards and 7 TDs. Normally the running game is emphasized but Boston College is incompetent on pass defense and this gives the Wildcats an opportunity to stretch it out; they could have 250 yards through the air.

Boston College rarely picks off passes, but the O-line/front seven battle on passing downs should be interesting. The Eagles have 34 sacks led by Kasim Edebali's 8.5 and Kevin Pierre-Louis' 6.

When Boston College has the ball

Boston College rushing offense: #16

Arizona rushing defense: #64

The challenger: Andre Williams of Boston College, who leads the nation with 2,102 yards and 17 touchdowns, with 175 yards per game and 6.39 yards per carry. High game(s): 339 vs. NC State, 295 vs. New Mexico State, 263 vs. Maryland, 263 vs. Army, 204 vs. Wake Forest. Low(s): 29 vs. Syracuse, 38 vs. USC, 70 vs. Clemson. Team yardage adjustment factor: 1.10 (about the same as Arizona, generally facing good defenses).

Andre Williams isn't as reliable as Carey but hits higher heights, as seen by his late-season Barry Sanders impression. A lot of that is because he carries the rushing load for the whole team; the next best runner has 321 yards for the season. Arizona's defense is only average against the run, so expect BC (maybe Williams alone) to have around 230 yards.

Boston College passing offense: #114	Arizona passing defense: #15   per att: #21
Boston College interceptions thrown ranking: #4	Arizona interceptions picked ranking: #46
Boston College quarterback protection rank: #36	Arizona pass rush rank: #98

Boston College has gone all-in on the running game and passing has suffered. Senior Chase Rettig saw his production fall from over 3,000 yards last year to under 2,000 this season. He has 17 TDs and 6 picks. Alex Amidon (895) is the only receiver above 200 yards.

Arizona's pass defense is an interesting stat. Like most Pac-12 teams they rank low by raw yardage due to the number of above average passing teams in the league (almost every team). The Wildcats are #77 in per-game yards allowed, but correcting for their opponents (Washington State, California, Oregon, Arizona State, et al) they rank #15. It hardly matters against Boston College, but they should hold the Eagles to just over 100 yards.

Arizona is probably out of luck if they want to get interceptions in this game as BC doesn't pass much so Rettig doesn't throw picks. And BC's protection is good (again, largely due to not passing) and Arizona's pass rush isn't great.

 

Arizona's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. Northern Arizona  W 35- 0
   
2. @ UNLV  W 58-13
   
3. Texas-San Antonio  W 38-13
   
4. @ Washington  L 13-31
   
5. @ Southern Cal  L 31-38
   
6. Utah  W 35-24
   
7. @ Colorado  W 44-20
   
8. @ California  W 33-28
   
9. #17 UCLA  L 26-31
   
10. Washington St  L 17-24
    
11. #10 Oregon  W 42-16
    
12. @ #14 Arizona St  L 21-58

What's most amazing about Arizona's season is not just the 42-16 beatdown of Oregon, but the fact that it occurred in the midst of a slump where the team lost three of four games.

In fact, the slump started with the slim 33-28 win over 1-11 California. The Wildcats then lost to UCLA 31-26 and Washington State 24-17 at home, destroyed Oregon, then fell to rival ASU 58-21.

The first half of the season was a bit less schizophrenic, as the Wildcats beat three decent teams, lost to Washington (31-13) and USC (38-31), and beat the rest of the Pac-12's losing teams. Think about this: Arizona held Northern Arizona, UNLV, and UTSA to 0, 13, and 13 points, but didn't hold another foe under 20 points...except Oregon.

Boston College's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (2)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. Villanova  W 24-14
   
2. Wake Forest  W 24-10
   
3. @ Southern Cal  L  7-35
   
4. #1 Florida St  L 34-48
   
5. Army  W 48-27
   
6. @ #12 Clemson  L 14-24
   
7. @ North Carolina  L 10-34
   
8. Virginia Tech  W 34-27
   
9. @ New Mexico St  W 48-34
   
10. North Carolina St  W 38-21
    
11. @ Maryland  W 29-26
    
12. @ Syracuse  L 31-34

Boston College's peak game was probably their 48-34 loss to Florida State, the closest any team came to beating the Seminoles during the season. After that it was pretty much downhill. They played well in the 24-14 loss to Clemson, too, and beating Virginia Tech 34-27 was impressive. They won four games in a row as Andre Williams went hog wild, until Syracuse beat the Eagles 34-31.

The Eagles started 3-4 mostly due to a tough schedule, and lost 35-7 to USC as Williams was held to 2.2 yards per carry. For comparison, Arizona lost to USC by a touchdown.

Key Injuries

Boston College has a whole slew of players questionable for the game, but the most important one has been upgraded to "probable": Andre Williams, who was injured against Syracuse, is expected to play. The next question: is he 100%? He needs to be for B.C. to have any hope.

Arizona, on the other hand, is pretty much without new injuries. They will probably be missing #4 RB Jared Baker and backup QB Javelle Allen (1 pass attempt) has been dismissed.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Arizona's season: +0 wins; Boston College's season: +5 wins
• Arizona's momentum: -1 win; Boston College's momentum: +1 win
• Arizona won final game: NO; Boston College won final game: NO
• Arizona glad to be there? maybe; Boston College glad to be there: yes
• Arizona time zones from home: 1; Boston College time zones from home: 1;
• Arizona coaching situation: stable; Boston College coaching situation: stable

A few interesting things: both teams lost their final game, but both had a silver lining. Boston College won four straight before that, and Arizona had the amazing Oregon win. That alone almost makes Arizona's season seem like a success, despite losing 3 of 4 at the end (including rival ASU by 37).

But Boston College probably has the emotional edge. They went from 2-10 to 7-5, and had to recover from a 3-4 start. Arizona went from 7-5...to 7-5, and at one time they were 6-2. Boston College is much happier to be playing in Shreveport than Arizona is, and during bowl season that can always make a big difference.

Final analysis

We take Carey over Williams; that is, consistency over variability.

Carey has had 100+ yards every game he's played in this year; Williams has gone over 250 yards four times, but also under 100 yards three times. Against USC he rushed 17 times for 38 yards; Carey rushed 21 times for 138 yards against the Trojans.

Make no mistake, they're both great, and it's hard to compare players since they play for a team, and teams have different components and emphases.

I guess what we mean is this: we take Carey's team over Williams' team. There's too much going for Arizona and not enough for Boston College. We realize BC had a turnaround year; that they won 4 of 5 at the end while Arizona lost three of four; and that in the bowl season team quality tends to take a back seat to which team "wants it" more.

But Arizona beat Oregon, badly. Boston College lost to FSU by two touchdowns, that's great, but Arizona had that Oregon win. Any team that can do that has to be reckoned with. Also, Andre Williams might not be 100% for the game, and we can't see Boston College competing under any circumstances unless he runs wild.

Prediction:  Arizona 34, Boston College 17

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Holiday Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Arizona State (10-3) vs. Texas Tech (7-5)

Monday, December 30: Holiday Bowl in San Diego, CA at 10:15 pm EST

#14 Arizona State Sun Devils (10-3) vs. Texas Tech Red Raiders (6-6)

The second bowl game in a row where a top-15 Pac-12 team faces an unranked Big Twelve team from Texas.

Vegas line/spread: Arizona State by 16 (over/under 71 1/2)

Like the Oregon-Texas game, the Pac-12 team is favored by two touchdowns, among the highest spreads of the bowl season. The line moved from 14 up to 16 by game day.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Arizona St	84%	63%
Texas Tech	16%	37%

Arizona State is an even bigger favorite in the Strength power rating than Oregon was; that's mainly because Texas Tech doesn't have home field advantage. Arizona State is #5 in the Strength power rating and Texas Tech is a woeful #50. ASU wins 5 of 6 comparisons and almost 2/3 vs. the spread.

Strength power rating:   Arizona St 49, Texas Tech 28     by Median rating:  Texas Tech 49-30
Arizona St scoring offense: #4 vs. Texas Tech scoring defense: #75
Arizona St scoring defense: #26 vs. Texas Tech scoring offense: #27

The Sun Devils should be able to score at will on Texas Tech's porous defense, and when Texas Tech is on offense it's about an even match, both units borderline top 25. The Sun Devils are a three touchdown favorite by our power rating.

Yardage analysis:   Arizona St 45, Texas Tech 31     per-play:   Arizona St 37, Texas Tech 21
Yardage differential: Arizona St #6 vs. Texas Tech #31
Arizona St total offense: #9 vs. Texas Tech total defense: #72
Arizona St total defense: #15 vs. Texas Tech total offense: #14

Texas Tech ranks a bit better in yardage differential than they do by points. The Raiders' offense is better at gaining yards than it is at scoring, but ASU's defense looks better when using adjusted yardages, too. The mismatch in the other comparison remains and we see ASU having about a 100 yard advantage in total offense, with both teams well over 400 yards. Converted to a score, the Sun Devils are a 14-point favorite, matching Vegas' line (but exceeding the over/under by a bit).

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Arizona State 49, Texas Tech 21

• Interceptions: With so much passing going on there are bound to be interceptions, at an unpredictable rate. The expected value based on total pass defenses favors Arizona State, by just over a point.
• Forced fumbles: The Red Raiders are surprisingly fumble-prone, enough to give ASU a 2 point edge here.
• Sacks: By our metric (sacks adjusted for opposition) Arizona State has the #1 pass rush in the country. Both teams should have multiple sacks during the game but ASU can expect to get 4 or 5, giving them another 4-point boost. Later, we'll see why this metric is probably exaggerated for the personnel playing in this game.
• Red zone%: Both teams have very good red zone offenses which should further boost scoring. We give both teams about 3 extra points.
• 3rd-down%: Arizona State is a very good 3rd down team—on both offense and defense. It should boost their score by a point and dock the Raiders almost 2 points.
• Special Teams: ASU ranks #45 and Texas Tech just #121 ESPN's rankings, another 3 point swing for the Sun Devils.

Summary: After modifications, the 14-point yardage spread surpassed even the 21-point Strength power rating spread and extended to 28 points. The combined score here matches Vegas' over/under.

When Arizona State has the ball

Arizona St rushing offense: #25

Texas Tech rushing defense: #101

People think of ASU as a passing team, and they are, but their #47 raw rushing rank is deceptive as they've faced strong rush defenses. Corrected, it just edges into the top 25 led by multi-purpose athlette Marion Grice's 996 yards and 14 TDs. QB Taylor Kelly also gets into the act with 473 net yards and 8 touchdowns. Texas Tech's rushing defense is pretty bad and may give up over 250 yards on the ground.

Arizona St passing offense: #18	Texas Tech passing defense: #23   per att: #33
Arizona St interceptions thrown ranking: #65	Texas Tech interceptions picked ranking: #113
Arizona St quarterback protection rank: #106	Texas Tech pass rush rank: #80

Taylor Kelly has passed for over 3,500 yards with 28 touchdowns on the year; his top target is Jaelen Strong with 1,094 yards. DJ Foster is #2 with 630 yards and #3 is RB Grice with 50 catches for 438. Texas Tech has a good pass defense, ranking #56 raw but #23 after correction for the pass-happy teams they've played (SMU, West Virginia, Oklahoma State, Baylor). Still, ASU will probably have over 250 yards through the air.

Kelly has thrown a reasonable 11 picks considering the 455 attempts, and Texas Tech has only 7 interception on the year. Pressure is more likely to be successful as Kelly has been sacked a whopping 36 times. The Red Raiders aren't a fearsome pass rush team though, and while they'll get some sacks they shouldn't be worse than what the Sun Devils have faced before.

When Texas Tech has the ball

Texas Tech rushing offense: #109

Arizona St rushing defense: #20

Unlike Arizona State, Texas Tech does not have a balanced offense; in fact it's one of the most unbalanced in college football apart from the service academies (who are unbalanced in the opposite direction). The Red Raiders use the run as a changeup from relentlessly throwing the ball, and Kenny Williams leads the team with 480 yards. Arizona State's rushing defense is solid and it will be a surprise if Texas Tech tops 100 yards.

Texas Tech passing offense: #1	Arizona St passing defense: #22   per att: #39
Texas Tech interceptions thrown ranking: #105	Arizona St interceptions picked ranking: #15
Texas Tech quarterback protection rank: #115	Arizona St pass rush rank: #1

When you do only one thing, you better do it well, and Texas Tech does it better than anyone in college football, at least in terms of total production. Actually they are #2 (behind Fresno State) in passing yards per game but after correction for opposition they are top dog.

And, they have two freshman quarterbacks that got them those yards exactly equally. Both Baker Mayfield and Davis Webb have 2,315 passing yards on the season. Mayfield completed 64% and threw 12 TD passes while Webb completed 62% for 16. Both had 9 interceptions; on an almost-equal split of 660 attempts, that's pretty good.

Mayfield played the majority of four of Tech's seven wins and Webb the other three. This is all significant since Mayfield recently left the program (he was a walk-on) to transfer and he won't play in the bowl game. He was injured mid-season and came back to play the majority of Tech's last three losses, but Webb was announced as the bowl game starter.

In any case, the key receivers are tight end Jace Amaro (1,240 yards), Eric Ward (904), Jakeem Grant (707), and Bradley Marquez (566). Arizona State has a good pass defense (like Texas Tech, they look mediocre until you correct for their schedule, which included Washington State, Oregon State, Washington, UCLA, and Colorado) but Tech will get their yardage, probably over 350.

Due to sheer volume Tech does give up interceptions and ASU gets lots of them, led by senior d-back Robert Nelson (6). And the pass rush is #1 in the country (after adjustment) with 40 sacks this season; Carl Bradford and Davon Coleman have 8.5 each and Chris Young has 7.5. Look for constant pressure on Webb, but note that he was sacked just 7 times (to Mayfield's 24). The #115 ranking is largely due to Mayfield. Still, ASU's defense will give Webb a lot to think about.

 

Arizona St's season (10-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (7)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (3) to losing teams (0)

1. Sacramento St  W 55- 0
   
2. #19 Wisconsin  W 32-30
   
3. @ #5 Stanford  L 28-42
   
4. Southern Cal  W 62-41
   
5. = Notre Dame  L 34-37
   
6. Colorado  W 54-13
   
7. Washington  W 53-24
   
8. @ Washington St  W 55-21
   
9. @ Utah  W 20-19
   
10. Oregon St  W 30-17
    
11. @ UCLA  W 38-33
    
12. Arizona  W 58-21
    
13. #5 Stanford  L 14-38

ASU had an interesting year; they could get Lane Kiffin fired but they couldn't beat Stanford, and the latter cost them a BCS bowl at the very least.

After steamrolling Sacramento State 55-0 the Sun Devils hosted Wisconsin and due to one of the weirdest endings ever they held on to win 32-30. Then Stanford punched them in the mouth 42-28 in a game that wasn't that close at all. Next came USC where a 28-point surge in the 3rd quarter was the reason Lane Kiffin got fired following the game. And after that, a neutral field 37-34 loss to Notre Dame; ASU could have been 4-1 but were lucky to not be 2-3.

At mid-season the Sun Devils hit their stride with 7 straight wins, putting up 50+ points on bowl teams Washington, Washington State, and Arizona; their closest win over the stretch was at 5-7 Utah, 20-19. Now it looked like they could take on Stanford—at home this time—and win a Rose Bowl berth. Not so, said the Cardinal, who pasted them just as bad only this time the final score, 38-14, accurately reflected the severity of the beatdown.

Texas Tech's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (1)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. @ SMU  W 41-23
   
2. S. F. Austin  W 61-13
   
3. TCU  W 20-10
   
4. Texas St  W 33- 7
   
5. @ Kansas  W 54-16
   
6. Iowa St  W 42-35
   
7. @ West Virginia  W 37-27
   
8. @ #11 Oklahoma  L 30-38
   
9. #13 Oklahoma St  L 34-52
   
10. Kansas St  L 26-49
    
11. = #6 Baylor  L 34-63
    
12. @ Texas  L 16-41

Texas Tech bolted to seven straight wins and closed with seven straight losses. How did it happen?

It wasn't because Baker Mayfield went out with an injury. The offense did just as well with Webb at the helm, winning a few games and playing just as well during the early losses before Mayfield returned.

If anything it was the defense that played worse in the 5 losses. But the Red Raiders would have had to play a LOT better defense to have ended up with a win in the last 5 games, other than perhaps Oklahoma.

The real culprit was simply schedule. In the first seven games, Texas Tech didn't play any team that was selected for a bowl game this season. After beating SMU 41-23, SF Austin 61-13, and TCU, 20-10 they looked pretty impressive, but SMU finished 5-7 and TCU just 4-8. Iowa State and even West Virginia missed a bowl game. The only bowl-eligible team they beat was Texas State, and they weren't selected. Then the losses started and got worse with every game: Oklahoma 38-30, Oklahoma State 52-34, Kansas State 49-26, Baylor 63-34, and Texas 41-16.

It really wasn't unexpected; in our pre-season game-by-game picks we forecast a 6-1 start with an 0-5 ending. The team that we didn't think they'd beat? TCU, whom we pegged as a borderline top 25 team. Interestingly, for a while our #50 projection for Texas Tech looked wayyy low, but that's exactly where they sit right now.

Key Injuries

The key player missing for Texas Tech is Baker Mayfield, the one responsible for most of the team's wins. But really, fellow freshman Davis Webb performed almost identically in aggregate; both could beat the bad teams but not the good teams. And it's probably a good thing that it's Webb and no Mayfield facing ASU's pass rush.

For Arizona State, Marion Grice was questionable, then probable, and now is doubtful for the game. That's a big loss for the Sun Devils as Grice is the team's top rusher and kick returner and the #3 receiver. They did well against Arizona, but not Stanford, without Grice; Texas Tech's defense is worse than both so it might not be the huge problem it would be against a staunch D.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Arizona St's season: +3 wins; Texas Tech's season: +0 wins
• Arizona St's momentum: +2 wins; Texas Tech's momentum: -5 wins
• Arizona St won final game: NO; Texas Tech won final game: NO
• Arizona St glad to be there? no; Texas Tech glad to be there: no
• Arizona St time zones from home: 1; Texas Tech time zones from home: 1;
• Arizona St coaching situation: stable; Texas Tech coaching situation: stable

Arizona State gained three wins from last year, but does that offset the disappointment of not going to the Rose Bowl? We're not sure, but the Holiday Bowl is definitely a downgrade from what they'd hoped for just a few weeks ago. Texas Tech, on the other hand, can't be very happy with how things played out. They finished the same 7-5 as last year, with an even more exaggerated trajectory. From 7-0 to 7-5 can really humble a team, and the only reason they might be glad to be here is that their late slide might have put a bowl bid in jeopardy given the number of teams that weren't chosen.

So while ASU is disappointed, Texas Tech's season was far worse and can't really be called a success like ASU's can. But ASU's reward for going 10-3 and playing in the Pac-12 title game is a middling bowl game against the Big Twelve's #6 (and falling) team? That is kind of a slap in the face.

Will the Sun Devils feel insulted and take it out on the hapless Raiders? Or will they get overconfident and be ripe for upset?

Final analysis

Texas Tech's one-dimensional offense faces Arizona State's strong 2-dimensional attack. And that's not all: Tech's defense is also one-dimensional (they can't stop the run) while ASU's D can handle both attacks.

The Red Raiders faltered at the end while facing tough opposition, and they face another tough opponent in ASU. Having given no indication they can beat a good team, we can only guess they won't beat the Sun Devils. They seemed to get worse with every loss and most of that decline was on defense, and they can't afford to be bad on defense against ASU.

Only one thing gives Texas Tech a chance, and that's overconfidence by Arizona State. Disappointed that they didn't go to the Rose Bowl, the Sun Devils show up in name only and get surprised. Can't happen?

In 2004, Cal was the 2nd best team in the country behind USC (the only team to beat them) but shady tactics by the Texas AP sportswriters (the AP poll was part of the BCS until this happened) put Texas in the Rose Bowl instead of Cal. Assigned to the Holiday Bowl (coincidence?) they were a 17-point favorite over a middling opponent who had only defeated one bowl-eligible team; the Bears came in lamenting their bad fortune over missing the Rose Bowl as well as overconfident and went through the motions and were shocked by their opponent, losing outright, 45-31.

That opponent? Texas Tech. Spooky, no?

The Red Raiders were 7-4 that year and rated quite a bit better than this year's team, and hadn't lost 5 straight games. Still, that team was even a bigger underdog than this year's model.

Regardless of historical precedent, it's hard to look at the comparisons above and pick Texas Tech, even against the spread. ASU may be disappointed at not going to the Rose Bowl but they were soundly beaten by Stanford, not defeated by a Hail Mary or a field goal return or cheated by a bad call or by AP sportswriters. They were thoroughly whipped, which we think ironically bodes well for their bowl fortunes—they can move on and focus on this game rather than think about what might have been.

(But if Texas Tech shocks the world and wins don't say we didn't at least warn you, even as we take ASU in a near-rout)

Prediction:  Arizona State 42, Texas Tech 24

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Alamo Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Oregon (10-2) vs. Texas (8-4)

Monday, December 30: Alamo Bowl in San Antonio, TX at 6:45 pm EST

#10 Oregon Ducks (10-2) vs. Texas Longhorns (8-4)

Pre-season, one would have thought that an Oregon-Texas bowl game might have been the national championship, or at least the Fiesta Bowl. Instead, the Alamo Bowl will be Mack Brown's last stand.

Vegas line/spread: Oregon by 13 1/2 (over/under 67)

Oregon is a very solid favorite by the oddsmakers; the line was two touchdowns early and has dropped only by 1/2 point in the last two weeks.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Oregon	79%	54%
Texas	21%	46%

Despite their 2 losses, Oregon still ranks #3 in the All-Division Strength power rating, while Texas is a humble #30. Comparing their game performances, we see Oregon winning about 4 of 5 contests; against the spread they still take a majority. We are giving Texas nearly full home field advantage for playing in-state, as they will have a solid majority of fans in San Antonio.

Strength power rating:   Oregon 41, Texas 25     by Median rating:  Oregon 43-23
Oregon scoring offense: #3 vs. Texas scoring defense: #32
Oregon scoring defense: #16 vs. Texas scoring offense: #39

Oregon is a 16-point favorite by the Strength power rating, and that includes home field advantage for the Longhorns. Oregon's scoring offense is #3 in the nation and their defense is top-25 worthy. Texas is good on both offense and defense but great at neither.

Yardage analysis:   Oregon 46, Texas 24     per-play:   Oregon 45, Texas 21
Yardage differential: Oregon #2 vs. Texas #38
Oregon total offense: #2 vs. Texas total defense: #38
Oregon total defense: #21 vs. Texas total offense: #47

Things get even worse if we just look at the yards-from-scrimmage situation. Here, the gulf between the teams looks even wider than it does from a points perspective. It's basically more of the same though with the Ducks a heavy favorite. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Oregon 44, Texas 25

• Interceptions: Marcus Mariota went almost the whole season without throwing a pick, so it's no surprise we give the edge here to Oregon, but fewer than 2 points as interceptions aren't expected to affect either team very much.
• Forced fumbles: Oregon does fumble the ball quite a bit; luckily they offset this by forcing fumbles on defense. Still, Texas gets an edge here of nearly 2 1/2 points.
• Sacks: Texas should win this battle, too, on average. We give the Longhorns about 1 1/2 points.
• Red zone%: Texas' red zone play on offense and defense is surprisingly superior to Oregon's; we add a point for Texas and dock Oregon over 2 points.
• 3rd-down%: The Ducks should have a slight edge on 3rd down conversions, adding just over a point.
• Special Teams: Oregon has the #40 special teams according to ESPN advanced stats and Texas ranks #57; this adds 1.15 points to Oregon and 0.29 to Texas.

Summary: Texas gained a little bit of ground on the Ducks but not enough to change the forecast at all.

When Oregon has the ball

Oregon rushing offense: #10

Texas rushing defense: #73

Oregon ended up with four players over 500 yards: Byron Marshall (995), Thomas Tyner (689), quarterback Marcus Mariota (582), and De'Anthony Thomas (581) who missed the middle part of the season. The four totalled 40 touchdowns. Texas' rushing defense has been a problem and was exposed dramatically in the early loss to BYU when they gave up 550 yards.

Since that game they've been a lot better; the 272 by Ole Miss in the next game was the highest total until Baylor ran for 221 in the final game. Along the way they held K-State to 115, Oklahoma to 130, TCU to 45, West Virginia to 109 and Texas Tech to 94. But most of those teams are passing teams anyway; Oregon is closest to BYU in rushing, and while 550 yards is not expected, the Ducks should pick up around 280.

Oregon passing offense: #15	Texas passing defense: #13   per att: #26
Oregon interceptions thrown ranking: #14	Texas interceptions picked ranking: #87
Oregon quarterback protection rank: #28	Texas pass rush rank: #12

Oregon has a true dual-threat offense run by a dual-threat quarterback. Marcus Mariota passed for 3,412 yards and 30 touchdowns this year with just 4 interceptions. Josh Huff was the leading receiver with 1,036 yards and Bralon Addison had 842. Texas has a much better pass defense than rushing defense and could hold the Ducks to just over 250 yards.

Texas doesn't get many interceptions and Mariota doesn't throw them, so the Longhorns' best bet is to pressure on passing downs where their pass rush can do its thing. Jackson Jeffcoat has 12 sacks and Cedric Reed has 9 on the year.

When Texas has the ball

Texas rushing offense: #42

Oregon rushing defense: #57

Johnathan Gray (780) is still the team's leading rusher though he was lost for the year after 9 games. Set to take over the #1 spot soon is Malcolm Brown (774 yards, 9 TDs). Oregon's rushing defense is vulnerable as Stanford and Arizona showed, and Texas could manage around 180 yards.

Texas passing offense: #54	Oregon passing defense: #10   per att: #8
Texas interceptions thrown ranking: #60	Oregon interceptions picked ranking: #56
Texas quarterback protection rank: #34	Oregon pass rush rank: #48

Case McCoy, sort of a perennial co-starter anyway, took over for the injured David Ash early in the season, and has struggled as he always has, completing 57% with 11 touchdowns and 11 picks. Ash had 720 yards and a 7:2 ratio in the first few games. Receivers Mike Davis (715 yards) and Jaxon Shipley (581) have led the team for three years now. Oregon's pass defense is very good and should hold the Longhorns below 200 yards.

Oregon's chances for interceptions could be underestimated given that McCoy throws more than Ash, but his totals make the majority of stats. He's actually less sack-prone than Ash this year, too.

 

Oregon's season (10-2)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (5)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (2) to losing teams (0)

1. Nicholls St  W 66- 3
   
2. @ Virginia  W 59-10
   
3. Tennessee  W 59-14
   
4. California  W 55-16
   
5. @ Colorado  W 57-16
   
6. @ Washington  W 45-24
   
7. Washington St  W 62-38
   
8. #17 UCLA  W 42-14
   
9. @ #5 Stanford  L 20-26
   
10. Utah  W 44-21
    
11. @ Arizona  L 16-42
    
12. Oregon St  W 36-35

Oregon's season—at least the first two-thirds of it—was pretty incredible. They won their opener 66-3 against Nicholls State, then scored 59 in beating BCS conference teams Virginia and Tennessee, then 55 and 57 against Pac-12 teams Cal and Colorado. None of those teams finished with a winning record, but then they beat bowl teams Washington (45-24), Washington State (62-38), and UCLA (42-14).

The Ducks were unstoppable until they went to Stanford, and several blown opportunities left them scoreless after three quarters. Still, they nearly made a game of it in the end before falling 26-20. After beating Utah 44-21 they were crushed inexplicably by Arizona, 42-16. They barely beat faltering rival Oregon State 36-35 to finish 10-2. The defense and the offense can share blame for Oregon's late troubles.

Texas's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. New Mexico St  W 56- 7
   
2. @ Brigham Young  L 21-40
   
3. Mississippi  L 23-44
   
4. Kansas St  W 31-21
   
5. @ Iowa St  W 31-30
   
6. = #11 Oklahoma  W 36-20
   
7. @ TCU  W 30- 7
   
8. Kansas  W 35-13
   
9. @ West Virginia  W 47-40 OT
   
10. Oklahoma St  L 13-38
    
11. Texas Tech  W 41-16
    
12. @ Baylor  L 10-30

Where can we start? In a season where Texas was supposed to be "back" once again, the BYU loss was such a debacle that the "fire Mack Brown" camp charged in high gear. The subsequent loss to Ole Miss seemed inevitable. But then the team managed to beat K-State, lucked out a win over Iowa State, and most shockingly of all, upset and even dominated Oklahoma in the Red River Shootout.

Three wins later Texas was 7-2 and there was sentiment that Brown could hold onto his job. But the big losses to Oklahoma State and Baylor put an end to that talk; soon rumors were swirling and Brown indeed resigned just hours before this writing.

Key Injuries

Marcus Mariota was slowed by injury during the 2nd half of the year when Oregon (relatively) struggled; with time off, he should be at full running strength for the bowl game. Leading rusher Byron Marshall is questionable for the game (now upgraded to probable), but Oregon has DeAnthony Thomas back. The Ducks are dinged at tight end with Colt Lyeria and Pharoah Brown gone but have others to cover there.

For Texas, the running back picture has been bleak since leading rusher Johnathan Gray was lost for the year, and now #3 Joe Bergeron is questionable. But the worst news is the academic suspension of three players including starting offensive lineman Kennedy Estelle and top kick returner Daje Johnson. The Longhorns also might be short a couple of linebackers.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Oregon's season: -1 win; Texas's season: +0 wins
• Oregon's momentum: -2 wins; Texas's momentum: +0 wins
• Oregon won final game: YES; Texas won final game: NO
• Oregon glad to be there? no; Texas glad to be there: no
• Oregon time zones from home: 1; Texas time zones from home: 0;
• Oregon coaching situation: stable; Texas coaching situation: coach resigned

Both teams expected better things. Texas knew early on it wasn't going to get them, but Oregon was certain until around a month ago that they would be playing for the national championship. So while Oregon had a much better year than Texas, their letdown is probably greater—especially considering that fans felt they should have been selected for a BCS bowl.

The main factors in this game will be overconfidence on Oregon's part and emotional response on Texas' part to Mack Brown's resignation.

Coupled with the letdown factor, Oregon could come out sluggish as they know they should dominate Texas—just like Oklahoma knew they would dominate Texas in October. Will the Ducks be motivated? And will they take Texas seriously? If either question can be answered "no" the game will be closer than expected, and if both are "no" the Ducks are ripe for upset.

The other factor could affect Texas in either direction. Mack Brown will be coaching his last game, and the team may be extra motivated to give him a win. But the flipside is this: Texas has had some of the best recruiting of any team over the years; were those players just not motivated to win for Brown over the last several underachieving seasons? Can they just "turn it on" now to give him a going-away win, and do they really want to?

Final analysis

The numbers all say Oregon in a landslide, that much is clear. But the numbers never would have pointed to Arizona beating Oregon 41-16, or Texas beating Oklahoma 36-20. Both those games happened because of particular circumstances mostly due to psychology, and this game is full of possibilities.

The Mack Brown factor can probably be discounted, we think, for reasons we denoted above. The team surprised Oklahoma because the Sooners assumed they would win, not because Mack Brown was embattled. I'm sure they'd like to send him off with a win, but I don't think they players view him with the love that say, USC's players felt for Ed Orgeron. They've been underachieving under Mack Brown for several seasons.

Which brings up a good point—the talent level at these two schools is actually pretty similar. Texas could be as good as Oregon, and has shown moments of it, though few and far between. If Oregon thinks this game is going to be easy, they could be in a trap. Overconfidence really could kill the Ducks.

Lack of motivation, too. Texas will at least be somewhat motivated to win. Oregon will be playing another game. Texas is a prominent enough opponent that Oregon won't sleepwalk through the game, but it's safe to say they aren't fired up for this bowl game considering they seemed a shoo-in for the BCS not long ago.

 When the Mack Brown matter was still unresolved, this looked like a clear three-touchdown win for Oregon. With the uncertainly resolved, that takes a load off the team's mind, and could even give some motivation. Playing near home against an overconfident Oregon, they now have a chance. But the team is without its #1 quarterback and #1 rusher and is coming off a 20-point loss to an Oregon analogue, Baylor. They'll give it the old college try but I think they still come up short.

Prediction:  Oregon 31, Texas 23

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Music City Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Mississippi (7-5) vs. Georgia Tech (7-5)

Monday, December 30: Music City Bowl in Nashville, TN at 3:15 pm EST

Mississippi Rebels (7-5) vs. Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets (7-5)

Two typical 7-5 teams, but a good matchup for a southern bowl game.

Vegas line/spread: Mississippi by 3 (over/under 56 1/2)

As seems to be true for every bowl game this season, it's a 3-point edge according to the oddsmakers, with Ole Miss the favorite.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Mississippi	44%	39%
Georgia Tech	56%	61%

In our Strength power rating Georgia Tech is the favorite, ranking 24th to Ole Miss at #34, and winning most of the game comparisons. Interestingly, using just whole-game performance, Ole Miss wins 52% straight up; it's only when offense and defense are split and recombined that Georgia Tech wins the majority. Mississippi had a run of very consistently good games near the end that give them the game-performance edge under certain conditions.

Strength power rating:   Georgia Tech 29, Mississippi 26     by Median rating:  Georgia Tech 28-27
Mississippi scoring offense: #51 vs. Georgia Tech scoring defense: #36
Mississippi scoring defense: #25 vs. Georgia Tech scoring offense: #24

When Georgia Tech has the ball it's a battle of top 25 teams. When Mississippi has the ball, Georgia Tech's defense has the edge. That give the Wreck a 3-point advantage according to the Strength power rating. As mentioned above, the median rating culls the outliers and Ole Miss is a lot closer to winning.

Yardage analysis:   Mississippi 28, Georgia Tech 27     per-play:   Mississippi 33, Georgia Tech 32
Yardage differential: Mississippi #19 vs. Georgia Tech #22
Mississippi total offense: #23 vs. Georgia Tech total defense: #20
Mississippi total defense: #25 vs. Georgia Tech total offense: #34

Now it gets interesting. By comparing adjusted yardage, Ole Miss is a 1-point favorite, expected to gain just over 400 total yards of offense while Georgia Tech has just under 400. Mississippi's offense ranks in the top 25 in yardage, and if they can convert that into points properly, they can win.

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Georgia Tech 35, Mississippi 22

• Interceptions: Georgia Tech could have the edge here since, as they rarely pass, they rarely throw picks (though their rate per attempt is quite high). We give them about 2 points using figures based on total pass defenses (picks + breakups). When using just interceptions, the advantage appears to be with Mississippi so this category might be discounted.
• Forced fumbles: Conversely, the team that carries the ball all the time is more vulnerable to fumbles; we give Mississippi over 5 points here, as they are very good at forcing fumbles.
• Sacks: And, another edge for Georgia Tech due to their lack of passing, and a great pass rush; they might win the sacks battle upwards of 3-0, a 5 point edge.
• Red zone%: Georgia Tech wins this one big, and Mississippi's yardage-to-points discrepancy can be explained a lot by poor red zone offense. Meanwhile Tech is #2 in converting red zone opportunities, adjusted for opponents' defenses. This gives Georgia Tech about 4 points and docks Ole Miss over three points.
• 3rd-down%: Ole Miss should convert third down at a normal clip (40%) while Georgia Tech should see over a 50% rate. That's over a 3-point edge for the Yellow Jackets.
• Special Teams: Georgia Tech gets 0.4 points for their special teams while Ole Miss loses over 1 point.

Summary: Mississippi's edge disappears and becomes a big margin for the Yellow Jackets, even if we take away the interceptions edge that offered conflicting evidence.

When Mississippi has the ball

Mississippi rushing offense: #39

Georgia Tech rushing defense: #9

Mississippi uses a running back by committee approach with I'Tavius Mathers leading with 506 yards. Georgia Tech has a lockdown rushing defense and should hold Ole Miss to about 125 yards.

Mississippi passing offense: #27	Georgia Tech passing defense: #61   per att: #89
Mississippi interceptions thrown ranking: #57	Georgia Tech interceptions picked ranking: #76
Mississippi quarterback protection rank: #50	Georgia Tech pass rush rank: #14

Bo Wallace topped 3,000 yards this season with 17 touchdowns and 9 interceptions. Donte Moncrief led with 825 yards and two others topped 500 apiece. Georgia Tech's passing defense is suspect and this is how Ole Miss will get most of their yardage; look for nearly 300 yards from Wallace.

Georgia Tech doesn't offer a huge interceptions threat but they have a killer pass rush: 32 sacks in all led by Jeremiah Attaochu with 12.

When Georgia Tech has the ball

Georgia Tech rushing offense: #3

Mississippi rushing defense: #29

This is always the key to any game with Georgia Tech: can a team stop their relentless triple option running game? And given more bowl preparation time, will they stifle the Wreck like some teams (LSU, Iowa) have in the past?

Georgia Tech has four runners over 400 yards including David Sims with 846 and QB Vad Lee at #3 with 489. Mississippi has a solid rushing defense and based just on that, Georiga Tech should have around 280 yards on the ground. Looking at per-carry figures, the Yellow Jackets rank #10 and Ole Miss's defense is #27, so the comparison doesn't change a lot. It's the extra prep time that might change the equation.

Looking at per-carry stats can be helpful, too. Georgia Tech ranks #10 in per-carry adjusted yardage, so it's not just volume of reps that make them one of the best rushing offenses. Mississippi's per-carry defensive rank is #27, so not much changes in our analysis.

Georgia Tech passing offense: #119	Mississippi passing defense: #42   per att: #16
Georgia Tech interceptions thrown ranking: #71	Mississippi interceptions picked ranking: #34
Georgia Tech quarterback protection rank: #4	Mississippi pass rush rank: #95

Georgia Tech doesn't pass a lot and it shows, but they use it as a surprise change-of-pace from the relentless running game. Vad Lee has completed 47% of his passes for 1,414 yards and 10 TDs with 9 interceptions. Robert Godhigh leads receivers with 420 yards and 2 TDs. Mississippi should defend the surprise pass pretty well, holding them to maybe 120 yards.

Tech's interception rate is pretty high, but they don't throw it very often so the total is somewhat low. Still, Ole Miss has Cody Prewitt (6 picks) waiting in the wings. Sacks are rare for Georgia Tech, and Mississippi's pass rush is weak; better to ball-hawk when it goes up in the air.

 

Mississippi's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. @ Vanderbilt  W 39-35
   
2. SE Missouri St  W 31-13
   
3. @ Texas  W 44-23
   
4. @ #3 Alabama  L 0-25
   
5. @ #2 Auburn  L 22-30
   
6. Texas A&M  L 38-41
   
7. #16 LSU  W 27-24
   
8. Idaho  W 59-14
   
9. Arkansas  W 34-24
   
10. Troy  W 51-21
    
11. #8 Missouri  L 10-24
    
12. @ Mississippi St  L 10-17 OT

Mississippi won three games, lost three games, won four, then lost two to finish 7-5. Along the way they beat Texas 44-23 and LSU 27-24, but were upset in the final game by rival Mississippi State in overtime.

The meager win over Southeast Missouri State (31-13) was a low point, following by a high point in getting revenge on Texas, 44-23 (looking ahead, perhaps?) but after that the team was pretty darn consistent, playing about the same win or lose. Don't expect anything outrageous from the Rebels.

Georgia Tech's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (1)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. Elon  W 70- 0
   
2. @ #24 Duke  W 38-14
   
3. North Carolina  W 28-20
   
4. Virginia Tech  L 10-17
   
5. @ Miami FL  L 30-45
   
6. @ Brigham Young  L 20-38
   
7. Syracuse  W 56- 0
   
8. @ Virginia  W 35-25
   
9. Pittsburgh  W 21-10
   
10. @ Clemson  L 31-55
    
11. Alabama A&M  W 66- 7
    
12. Georgia  L 34-41 2OT

Like Ole Miss, Georiga Tech beat four bowl-eligible teams and one of them (Duke) finished in the BCS top 25. Two of their wins were over FCS schools Elon and Alabama A&M by a combined 136-7. But neither of those games was the team's high-water mark of quality—that came in a 56-0 shutout of Syracuse in game 7.

The low point(s) were during a three-game losing streak, as well as a 55-31 loss to Clemson late. Their loss to Georgia in double overtime doesn't look that bad until you realize that Georgia was without Aaron Murray and still managed to beat the Wreck on their home field.

Key Injuries

Neither team has any definitive new injuries, though both have players who are questionable to play on offensive line. Update: Ole Miss's #2 receiver, Ja-Mes Logan, is likely out for the game due to academics.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Mississippi's season: +1 win; Georgia Tech's season: +1 win
• Mississippi's momentum: +1 win; Georgia Tech's momentum: +1 win
• Mississippi won final game: NO; Georgia Tech won final game: NO
• Mississippi glad to be there? maybe; Georgia Tech glad to be there: maybe
• Mississippi time zones from home: 0; Georgia Tech time zones from home: 1;
• Mississippi coaching situation: stable; Georgia Tech coaching situation: stable

The Rebel and Yellow Jacket seasons followed a very similar trajectory, both starting 3-0, losing three straight, then winning four of the next five to sit at 7-4. Both teams took a loss in their final game to a rival team, so those should cancel each other out, but an Ole Miss loss to Mississippi State hits harder than Georgia Tech losing to Georgia. Both finished the season 7-5 after a 6-6 regular season last year. Pretty even overall.

Final analysis

Preparation time factor: First let's discuss the idea (pretty well established) that teams with extra time to prepare (usually 10+ days) do better against the Yellow Jackets than those who have just a week. The record speaks for itself, as the majority of Georgia Tech's losses come when their opponent has more time to prepare their defense for the triple option. Bowl games are a problem area for the Wreck because of this, and particularly when the other defense is good to start with.

This year the record was mixed, as North Carolina fell 28-20 despite two weeks to prepare, and Virginia Tech won 17-10 despite only 5 days to prep. BYU won with an extra day of prep (though 8 days isn't considered extra time here). Clemson did win 55-31 with 12 days advance notice. Mississippi will have a full three weeks and that is significant, particularly since the Rebels have a top 25 defense.

But Georgia Tech might have turned a corner in bowl games by beating USC last season. Surely the Trojans used the extra time to prepare wisely? Ok, it's clear that last year's win was mostly Southern Cal's team going off the rails, but Georgia Tech had something to do with it. And this year's model has a good defense, which won't be affected by the other team's preparation time. We'll use the modified yardage adjustment, take away a full touchdown from Georgia Tech, and still pick them to win in a mild upset.

Prediction:  Georgia Tech 28, Mississippi 23

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Armed Forces Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Navy (8-4) vs. Middle Tennessee State (8-4)

Monday, December 30: Armed Forces Bowl in Ft. Worth, TX at 11:45 pm EST

Navy Midshipmen (8-4) vs. Middle Tennessee State Blue Raiders (8-4)

Neither of these teams can be accused of backing into a bowl as they each carry a month-long winning streak into the game.

Vegas line/spread: Navy by 6 (over/under 56 1/2)

Fresh off a big win over Army, Navy is a 6 point favorite in their bowl game.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Navy	71%	59%
MTSU	29%	41%

Navy isn't a great team—they rank only #61 in the Strength power rating despite their 8-4 record—but they outclass MTSU, who ranks #91 despite a similar record. Navy wins over 7 out of 10 game comparisons, and still nearly 6 of 10 against the spread.

Strength power rating:   Navy 30, MTSU 21     by Median rating:  Navy 31-20
Navy scoring offense: #82 vs. MTSU scoring defense: #96
Navy scoring defense: #42 vs. MTSU scoring offense: #96

Navy is almost a 10-point favorite by our power rating, 9 points when both scores are rounded, 11 points when the teams' median performances are considered representative. Middle Tennessee's scoring offense and defense, adjusted for opposition, both rank a dismal 96th in the nation among all teams (all divisions). Navy's offense isn't much better, but their defense is and that's the difference.

Yardage analysis:   Navy 26, MTSU 24     per-play:   Navy 35, MTSU 24
Yardage differential: Navy #90 vs. MTSU #91
Navy total offense: #99 vs. MTSU total defense: #83
Navy total defense: #67 vs. MTSU total offense: #80

Using adjusted yardage, these teams are neck and neck, with Navy ranking 90th and Middle Tennessee 91st in yardage differential. Here, MTSU has a better offense, while Navy's defense is still superior. This breakdown projects nearly 400 yards of offense from each team with a slim edge for Navy that ends up a 2-point margin. The per-play measure is skewed by Navy's play-calling and probably offers little insight. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Navy 34, MTSU 30

• Interceptions: Navy doesn't throw a lot of interceptions because Navy doesn't throw a lot, nor do they get a lot of picks, so interceptions are expected to be low in this game. Navy has a slight edge here of just over a point.
• Forced fumbles: Since Navy carries the ball so much, it's expected that they would have more fumbles, but the difference isn't great. MTSU gains less than a point here.
• Sacks: You would think this is another win for Navy, but the Midshipment rank #118 in sacks by the defense, and allow a surprising amount themselves for a team that passes so little. In the end there probably won't be many sacks in the game but the Blue Raiders gain about 2 points.
• Red zone%: Middle Tennessee's poor red zone performance gives an edge to Navy, who gains about 2 points.
• 3rd-down%: Due to bad defense on both teams' part, both squads should convert around half of their 3rd down opportunities, which increases scoring by nearly 4 points each.
• Special Teams: Navy has great special teams (#15); they get over 2 points, while MTSU has above-average ranking themselves (#51), worth about half a point.

Summary: Navy pulls away just a bit, making a 4 point advantage with higher scoring overall.

When Navy has the ball

Navy rushing offense: #6

MTSU rushing defense: #99

Navy runs the ball almost exclusively and they are a top-ten rushing team as a result. Quarterback Keenan Reynolds leads the team with 1,260 yards and they have seven other players above 250 for the season. Reynolds has a stunning 29 touchdowns this year. Middle Tennessee's rushing defense is not very good and based on this we expect Navy to rush for about 330 yards.

When a team run this much, it's good to look at their adjusted per-carry average to see how much of their high ranking is due simply to endless repetitions. Navy ranks 30th in adjusted ypc, which isn't top-tier but is certainly strong. MTSU's defensive ypc is #87, not much better than their per-game average.

Navy passing offense: #124	MTSU passing defense: #62   per att: #85
Navy interceptions thrown ranking: #18	MTSU interceptions picked ranking: #37
Navy quarterback protection rank: #57	MTSU pass rush rank: #74

Navy hardly throws the ball, hence their 2nd-to-last ranking. Keenan Reynolds just barely topped 1,000 yards for the season with 8 touchdowns and 2 picks. Top receiver DeBrandon Sanders has just 217 yards. Navy will probably have just over 50 yards through the air.

Reynolds has just 2 picks, but he's been sacked 15 times against just 121 passing attempts, a ridiculous ratio. So on passing downs Middle Tennessee can have luck applying pressure.

When Middle Tennessee State has the ball

MTSU rushing offense: #51

Navy rushing defense: #82

Middle Tennessee has a decent rushing game with Jordan Parker and Reggie Whatley combining for over 1,300 yards and 9 TDs. Navy's rushing defense is vulnerable, and MTSU could gain around 200 yards on the ground.

MTSU passing offense: #87	Navy passing defense: #38   per att: #48
MTSU interceptions thrown ranking: #98	Navy interceptions picked ranking: #103
MTSU quarterback protection rank: #43	Navy pass rush rank: #118

Logan Kilgore has struggled a bit in his senior year, with 2,289 yards and 16 TDs but 11 interceptions. Receivers Tavarres Jefferson and Marcus Henry each barely topped 500 yards to lead the Raiders. Navy's pass defense is pretty good and they should hold MTSU under 200 yards.

Although Kilgore has had an interceptions problem, Navy isn't a great takeaway defense. And further, they rarely sack the quarterback so there might be opportunity for Kilgore to exceed expectations against the Midshipmen.

 

Navy's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. @ Indiana  W 41-35
   
2. Delaware  W 51- 7
   
3. @ Western Kentucky  L 7-19
   
4. Air Force  W 28-10
   
5. @ #24 Duke  L 7-35
   
6. @ Toledo  L 44-45 2OT
   
7. Pittsburgh  W 24-21
   
8. @ Notre Dame  L 34-38
   
9. Hawai`i  W 42-28
   
10. South Alabama  W 42-14
    
11. @ San José St  W 58-52 3OT
    
12. = Army  W 34- 7
    

Navy beat three bowl-eligible teams—all of whom finished 6-6, and only one of whom (Pitt) was actually picked for a bowl. They also lost to four bowl teams, including Western Kentucky who wasn't chosen.

Navy's opening 41-35 win over Indiana was pretty impressive even though the Hoosiers disappointed later. And the 51-7 blowout of a solid Delaware team bode well, too. The next three games were offensive duds, as the Midshipment scored just 7 against WKU and Duke, and even 28 against Air Force (in a 28-10 win) was inexcusable. They fell in 2 overtimes to Toledo, 45-44, to stand 3-3.

Then they beat Pittsburgh, 24-21, and nearly upset Notre Dame, falling 38-34. A four-game winning streak ensued including a 3 overtime 58-52 win at San Jose State and a 34-7 win over rival Army. The 2nd half of Navy's season was pretty solid, all things considered.

MTSU's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (2)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Western Carolina  W 45-24
   
2. @ North Carolina  L 20-40
   
3. Memphis  W 17-15
   
4. @ Florida Atlantic  W 42-35 OT
   
5. @ Brigham Young  L 10-37
   
6. East Carolina  L 17-24
   
7. @ North Texas  L 7-34
   
8. Marshall  W 51-49
   
9. @ UAB  W 24-21
   
10. Florida Int'l  W 48- 0
    
11. @ Southern Miss  W 42-21
    
12. UTEP  W 48-17

Middle Tennessee played a pretty tough early schedule and it showed in their record as the Blue Raiders were 3-4 at one point following losses to BYU (37-10), East Carolina (24-17) and North Texas (34-7), all back to back. Their only solid win at that point was beating FAU 42-35 in overtime.

But the 51-49 upset of Marshall keyed a late surge by the team, and the softness of the last month's schedule didn't hurt. MTSU won four more at the end over 2-10 UAB, 1-11 FIU, 1-11 Southern Miss, and 2-10 UTEP.

Key Injuries

Two Navy fullbacks are questionable for the game, but as noted the Midshipmen are stocked with replacement parts on offense. Middle Tennessee isn't reporting any new injuries.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Navy's season: +0 wins; MTSU's season: +0 wins
• Navy's momentum: +2 wins; MTSU's momentum: +2 wins
• Navy won final game: YES; MTSU won final game: YES
• Navy glad to be there? yes; MTSU glad to be there: yes
• Navy time zones from home: 1; MTSU time zones from home: 0;
• Navy coaching situation: stable; MTSU coaching situation: stable

These teams are in largely the same situation. Both were 8-4 last year and are 8-4 this year again. Both won numerous games to finish the season strong after a rocky start. The only difference is that when MTSU went 8-4 last year they weren't selected for a bowl game.

Final analysis

Neither of these teams lost to a bad team all year. But neither did they have a lot of great wins; Navy and MTSU each beat exactly one team that is participating in a bowl game this season.

While each team finished with a lengthy winning streak, Navy's was a bit more impressive. Middle Tennessee had some good moments—beating Marshall is no easy task—but it was mainly a fluke of scheduling that they finished with the #185, #264, #229, and #202 teams in the country. Navy's solid play started in the mid-season where they barely lost to Toledo, upset Pitt, and lost to Notre Dame by 4 points. From there they beat the #112, #93, #77, and #146 teams in the nation. That doesn't make them a BCS bowl hopeful but it's a tougher task than MTSU faced.

The Midshipment have a mixed bowl record at 3-6 over their last 9 appearances. This might be the "triple-option team" effect that plagues Georgia Tech in particular, where a team with a "gimmick" offense does worse when the opponent has time to prepare. It hits Georgia Tech hardest since they are usually facing better competition. Middle Tennessee's rushing defense isn't very good and even given three weeks to prepare they probably can't master it. It could cut into the winning margin, so we call for a narrow Navy win.

Prediction:  Navy 27, Middle Tennessee State 23

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Kansas State (7-5) vs. Michigan (7-5)

Saturday, December 28: Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl in Tempe, AZ at 10:15 pm EST

Kansas State Wildcats (7-5) vs. Michigan Wolverines (7-5)

Two teams who expected better seasons fight for one more win.

Vegas line/spread: Kansas State by 5 1/2 (over/under 54.5)

The Wildcats were favored early by 3 1/2 but that has risen to 5 1/2 points.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread*
Kansas State	57%	50%
Michigan	43%	50%

With K-State ranking #25 in the Strength power rating and Michigan #37, the Wildcats win the majority of the game-comparisons.

After adjusting for the *original 3.5 point spread, things get interesting. Comparing whole games (12 performances each, for 144 comparisons) each team wins 72 times, and exact tie. When splitting offenses and defenses to create 144 hypothetical performances and combining these for 144x144 or 20,736 trials, Kansas State beats the spread 50.06% of the time, or just 24 extra wins out of the 20,000+. So 3.5 points looks exactly right, even though it's an impossible finish.

Strength power rating:   Kansas State 32, Michigan 28     by Median rating:  Kansas State 31-28
Kansas State scoring offense: #29 vs. Michigan scoring defense: #47
Kansas State scoring defense: #31 vs. Michigan scoring offense: #33

Neither team has a top 25 offense or defense, but K-State is close in both departments and Michigan isn't far behind. The score estimate rounds off to a 4-point win for the Wildcats, or 3 points when comparing the median performances.

Yardage analysis:   Kansas State 24, Michigan 21     per-play:   Kansas St 38, Michigan 26
Yardage differential: Kansas State #41 vs. Michigan #54
Kansas State total offense: #58 vs. Michigan total defense: #41
Kansas State total defense: #29 vs. Michigan total offense: #69

By yardage alone, the teams look weaker on offense and the total score drops from 60 to 45 with a 3 point margin for Kansas State. They should gain nearly 400 total yards to Michigan's 350 in this scenario.

The per-play numbers suggest a larger spread due to a calculated 1-yard per play advantage for Kansas State. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Kansas State 31, Michigan 22

• Interceptions: The teams look even on interceptions but add in pass defenses and K-State has the edge in possible passing turnovers, leading to a nearly 2-point projected edge.
• Forced fumbles: This doesn't look like a big factor but we give K-State almost 1/2 point here.
• Sacks: Kansas State should have an advantage here, too, reducing Michigan's score by almost 2 points.
• Red zone%: Both teams should do well in the red zone, mainly because K-State is in the top ten there on offense and porous there on defense. We add almost 3 point for the Wildcats and 2 for Michigan.
• 3rd-down%: We add a few points for K-State here and a bit less again for Michigan.
• Special Teams: K-State's special teams rank surprisingly low, and we dock them 0.2 points for it; Michigan isn't much better and we dock them about the same, so no change.

Summary: It's nearly a clean sweep for Kansas State, bolstering the original 3-point edge into a 9-point win.

When Kansas State has the ball

Kansas State rushing offense: #49

Michigan rushing defense: #22

John Hubert essentially repeated last year performance with nearly 1,000 yards while QBs Daniel Sams and Jake Waters added up to another 1,000 themselves. Michigan has a tough rushing defense, however, and if they can deal with the running quarterbacks they should hold K-State to about 135 yards.

Kansas State passing offense: #66	Michigan passing defense: #84   per att: #48
Kansas State interceptions thrown ranking: #59	Michigan interceptions picked ranking: #18
Kansas State quarterback protection rank: #68	Michigan pass rush rank: #56

Daniel Sams does most the running and Jake Waters does most of the passing, with 2,198 yards to Sams' 452. Waters had 15 TD passes and 9 interceptions, completing 59% (Sams completed 73% but with a 4:4 ratio). Most of those completions were to Tyler Lockett who had 1,146 receiving yards. Michigan's pass defense has been problematic and K-State could get 250 yards through the air.

Blake Countess has 6 picks for the Wolverines and he'll look for more against the Wildcats. Michigan's pass rush isn't that fearsome but the Wildcats are somewhat vulnerable there.

When Michigan has the ball

Michigan rushing offense: #73

Kansas State rushing defense: #50

Michigan has had its problems running the ball this year, famously gaining -48 against Michigan State and -21 vs. Nebraska. But Michigan State has the nation's #2 (adjusted) rush defense, and they and Nebraska had 7 sacks each which dinged the rushing total. The Wolverines are #101 in raw rushing yards but they face tough rushing defenses and are really a much more respectable (though still quite weak) #73.

Fitzgerald Toussaint leads with 646 yards. K-State has a middling rushing defense and the Wolverines should have around 135 ground yards, about the same as the Wildcats.

Michigan passing offense: #48	Kansas State passing defense: #27   per att: #31
Michigan interceptions thrown ranking: #51	Kansas State interceptions picked ranking: #24
Michigan quarterback protection rank: #110	Kansas State pass rush rank: #50

Devin Gardner showed flashes of greatness and flashes of incompetence; there was no better example than the Notre Dame win where he threw four touchdown passes but also had one of the worse pick-sixes ever seen. For the year he had just shy of 3,000 yards, 21 TDs, and 11 interceptions. Jeremy Gallon (1,284 yards) is the go-to guy with Devin Funchess (727) another stalwart. K-State has a pretty good pass defense and should hold the Wolves to just over 200 yards.

Update: With Devin Gardner out, Michigan's passing game probably takes a hit, with freshman Shane Morris starting. He's a highly-touted recruit, so he might do well, too. Gardner might still play, but he won't start.

The Wildcats have 16 picks on the year, with no player having more than three, so it's a team thing. But sacks will be Michigan's real problem, as Gardner has gone down 34 times this year. Look for Ryan Mueller (12.5 sacks this year) to have a go at Gardner all night.

 

Kansas State's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (2)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. North Dakota St  L 21-24
   
2. UL-Lafayette W 48-27
   
3. Massachusetts  W 37- 7
   
4. @ Texas  L 21-31
   
5. @ #13 Oklahoma St  L 29-33
   
6. #6 Baylor  L 25-35
   
7. West Virginia  W 35-12
   
8. Iowa St  W 41- 7
   
9. @ Texas Tech  W 49-26
   
10. TCU  W 33-31
    
11. #11 Oklahoma  L 31-41
    
12. @ Kansas  W 31-10
    

Remarkably Kansas State beat just two bowl-eligible teams this year, ULL (48-27) and Texas Tech (49-26).

The opening 24-21 loss to North Dakota State was embarrassing for sure, but the Bison are the best in the FCS. Still, the Wildcats were 2-4 at one point and things looked bad. Luckily the schedule was front-loaded and wins over struggling West Virginia (35-12), Iowa State (41-7), Texas Tech (49-26), and TCU (33-31) righted the ship with two games left. They couldn't beat Oklahoma but in-state rival Kansas was another example of easy prey that K-State feasted on in 2013. The team played its best football in the middle of the season, including the losses to Oklahoma State, 33-29, and Baylor 35-25.

Michigan's season (7-5)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (5) to losing teams (0)

1. Central Michigan  W 59- 9
   
2. Notre Dame  W 41-30
   
3. Akron  W 28-24
   
4. @ Connecticut  W 24-21
   
5. Minnesota  W 42-13
   
6. @ Penn State  L 40-43 4OT
   
7. Indiana  W 63-47
   
8. @ #4 Michigan St  L 6-29
   
9. Nebraska  L 13-17
   
10. @ Northwestern  W 27-19 3OT
    
11. @ Iowa  L 21-24
    
12. #7 Ohio State  L 41-42

The myth about Michigan's season is that they played much worse down the stretch, but in reality their two worst games were early wins over Akron (28-24) and UConn (24-21) in which Michigan struggled to look like a team that had any business in a bowl.

But three other early wins made a case for the Wolverines as a top ten team: they beat 6-6 Central Michigan 59-9, 8-4 Notre Dame 41-30, and 8-4 Minnesota 42-13.

Then came the Penn State game, and the 43-40 quadruple overtime loss certainly helped deflate the team. After that they didn't beat another winning team and lost four of their last five games, pausing only to edge Northwestern in triple overtime. Though the Ohio State loss (42-41) was one of their best performances, it had to hurt to not get that 2-point extra point, leaving to rival Michigan State the glory of beating the Buckeyes.

Key Injuries

Devin Gardner has been questionable due to a toe injury and Brady Hoke announced that freshman Shane Morris will start in his place. Also, Michigan kicker Brendan Gibbons is probably out. K-State's injuries are limited.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Kansas State's season: -4 wins; Michigan's season: -1 win
• Kansas State's momentum: +3 wins; Michigan's momentum: -3 wins
• Kansas State won final game: YES; Michigan won final game: NO
• Kansas State glad to be there? maybe; Michigan glad to be there: maybe
• Kansas State time zones from home: 1; Michigan time zones from home: 1;
• Kansas State coaching situation: stable; Michigan coaching situation: stable

Kansas State fell from 11-1 to 7-5 in the regular season, which has to be disappointing but some decline was expected. Michigan, on the other hand, disappointed for the 2nd straight year as last year and this season were both supposed to be breakthroughs. So it's hard to say who had the worse year.

The teams had opposite season arc, with K-State starting 2-4 and finishing 5-1, while Michigan started 5-1 and ended 2-4. Advantage, K-State. The Wildcats also won their last game vs. rival Kansas while Michigan gave a great effort but fell short against Ohio State.

Both teams should still bring the fans to Tempe, but as for the teams Kansas State looks like they're in a better position to be positive about the year's developments, even as their season was nothing compared to last year's.

Final analysis

It's hard to imagine these teams being hyped up to go to the Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl. Kansas State played in the Fiesta Bowl last year, and Michigan was expecting much better things than this.

When teams are unenthused, often the defense is hurt the most, as intensity on offense doesn't count for too much but intensity on defense is everything. At the same time, sluggishness on offense isn't a virtue. Needless to say, if one team catches emotional fire they should have the edge.

We're going to go with the idea that Kansas State has made the most of the 2nd half of their season and the seniors want to get the team's first bowl win since 2002. Michigan has actually been playing a little better each game lately and won't roll over, but the Wolverines will probably be thinking "wait till next year" once again.

Prediction:  Kansas State 31, Michigan 24

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Russell Athletic Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Louisville (11-1) vs. Miami (9-3)

Saturday, December 28: Russell Athletic Bowl in Orlando, FL at 6:45 pm EST

#18 Louisville Cardinals (11-1) vs. Miami Hurricanes (9-3)

A pretty high-profile matchup in the Russell Athletic Bowl, between two teams who had BCS bowl dreams in the mid-season.

Vegas line/spread: Louisville by 3 1/2 (over/under 58)

The Cardinals were a field goal favorite early and that bumped up to 3 1/2 as of the day before the game. The over/under rose from 55 to 58.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Louisville	56%	49%
Miami FL	44%	51%

Louisville ranks a bit higher in the Strength power rating, #26 to #40, and naturally their game performances rate better. The slim spread evens things out and makes it a tossup, however.

Strength power rating:   Louisville 32, Miami FL 29     by Median rating:  Miami FL 31-30
Louisville scoring offense: #49 vs. Miami FL scoring defense: #72
Louisville scoring defense: #18 vs. Miami FL scoring offense: #19

People think of Louisville as an offensive power due to Teddy Bridgewater, but really it's their defense that gets the job done. That defense will have their hands full with Miami's similarly-rated offense, but the Cardinal offense has the edge on the Miami D, to the tune of 3 points, matching the Vegas line. Despite playing in-state we don't give Miami any home field advantage; Orlando is far enough from Miami that we should give them a point or two at the very most.

Interestingly, the median rating shows Miami favored by a point, but as we'll see later Miami's early games should be discounted somewhat.

Yardage analysis:   Louisville 41, Miami FL 27     per-play:   Louisville 41, Miami FL 38
Yardage differential: Louisville #21 vs. Miami FL #56
Louisville total offense: #41 vs. Miami FL total defense: #104
Louisville total defense: #10 vs. Miami FL total offense: #20

Miami's defense is terrible in terms of giving up yardage, which is why the spread leaps to two touchdowns based on adjusted yardages. Using this projection the Cardinals would outgain the Canes approximately 500 to 300 total yards.

On a per-play basis, however, things look close again, with Louisville having only a very small edge in yards per carry and yards per attempt. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Louisville 47, Miami FL 25

• Interceptions: Hardly any difference is seen here based on total pass defenses (breakups plus interceptions).
• Forced fumbles: Louisville might have a small advantage, about 1.5 points.
• Sacks: Miami should have about 1 more sack than Louisville, equal to almost 2 points.
• Red zone%: Louisville gains about 1 point here while Miami loses a point.
• 3rd-down%: This could be a big difference, as Louisville is in the top 15 in both offense and defense on 3rd down (adjusted for opponents). We see the Cardinals being successful on over half their third downs and Miami on just 1 of 3; this is a 7 point swing.
• Special Teams: Louisville has above-average special teams (worth 0.7 points); Miami's are even better, worth 1.8 points.

Summary: The adjustments above have only widened the gap rather than closing it toward the Vegas line or Strength power rating estimation.

When Louisville has the ball

Louisville rushing offense: #72

Miami FL rushing defense: #90

Louisville isn't a big rushing team but Dominique Brown and Senorise Perry combined for over 1,400 yards this season. With Miami's defense shaky, that could mean nearly 200 yards on the ground.

Louisville passing offense: #29	Miami FL passing defense: #104   per att: #87
Louisville interceptions thrown ranking: #8	Miami FL interceptions picked ranking: #19
Louisville quarterback protection rank: #89	Miami FL pass rush rank: #59

Teddy Bridgewater had all the Heisman hype in the world but he needed to make his team go undefeated, something he couldn't do. It's not like he disappointed: he threw for over 3,500 yards and 28 touchdowns with just 4 picks while completing 70% of his passes, and he's still the top QB in most mock drafts. DeVante Parker (743 yards) and Damian Copeland (690) were the top receivers. Miami had trouble against passing teams this year so look for Bridgewater to throw for over 300 yards.

Miami usually slows down opposing quarterbacks with interceptions (they have 18) but Bridgewater rarely gives the ball away. They'll have better luck with sacks as Bridgewater has been felled 22 times.

When Miami FL has the ball

Miami FL rushing offense: #41

Louisville rushing defense: #25

Duke Johnson led the Canes with 920 yards this year, and that's through 8 games, before his season-ending ankle injury. Dallas Crawford (523 yards) has filled in admirably, but he's no Duke. Louisville's rushing defense is #2 in raw figures but they played weak rushing offenses; still, it's in the top 25 and should hold Miami below 150 yards.

Miami FL passing offense: #21	Louisville passing defense: #11   per att: #20
Miami FL interceptions thrown ranking: #83	Louisville interceptions picked ranking: #21
Miami FL quarterback protection rank: #13	Louisville pass rush rank: #22

Stephen Morris' senior year wasn't quite as good as his junior season, but he nearly has 3,000 yards with a similar 21 touchdowns and 59% completion percentage. Allen Hurns (1,138 yards) and Stacy Coley (559) lead the receivers. Louisville has a strong pass defense, however, and should hold Miami to around 250 yards.

Morris has been sacked just 11 times, so despite Louisville's solid pass rush (Maurice Smith has 12.5 and Lorenzo Mauldin 9.5), the Canes should defend the QB well (note that Louisville adjusts from #3 in the nation in sacks to #22 due to their weak opposition). Morris has thrown 12 picks and Louisville might be able to take advantage of that but Charles Gaines (5 picks) might not play.

 

Louisville's season (11-1)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (1) to losing teams (0)

1. Ohio U.  W 49- 7
   
2. Eastern Kentucky  W 44- 7
   
3. @ Kentucky  W 27-13
   
4. Florida Int'l  W 72- 0
   
5. @ Temple  W 30- 7
   
6. Rutgers  W 24-10
   
7. #15 Central Florida  L 35-38
   
8. @ South Florida  W 34- 3
   
9. @ Connecticut  W 31-10
   
10. Houston  W 20-13
    
11. Memphis  W 24-17
    
12. @ Cincinnati  W 31-24 OT

One loss, and all was lost. The 38-35 home loss to Central Florida was enough to derail both Louisville's national championship and BCS bowl hopes; despite winning out the rest of the way, it was to no avail.

But even if they'd gone undefeated they probably wouldn't be in the BCS title game, as they played just five bowl-eligible teams. The first, Ohio, didn't put up much fight, losing 49-7. Several blowouts later the Cards were 6-0 and looked like a top ten team. That ended with the UCF loss and after it the team seemed a lot less motivated, like the air had gone out of their sails. They beat but didn't really overwhelm struggling USF (34-3) and UConn (31-10), and narrowly edged Houston 20-13, Memphis 24-17, and Cincy 31-24 in overtime.

Miami FL's season (9-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (3) to losing teams (0)

1. Florida Atlantic  W 34- 6
   
2. Florida  W 21-16
   
3. Savannah St  W 77- 7
   
4. @ South Florida  W 49-21
   
5. Georgia Tech  W 45-30
   
6. @ North Carolina  W 27-23
   
7. Wake Forest  W 24-21
   
8. @ #1 Florida St  L 14-41
   
9. Virginia Tech  L 24-42
   
10. @ #24 Duke  L 30-48
    
11. Virginia  W 45-26
    
12. @ Pittsburgh  W 41-31

Miami's first win (34-6 over Florida Atlantic) looks pretty good now while their 2nd (21-16 over Florida) has lost some luster. The Canes rolled to a 7-0 record and were riding high in the BCS before falling to earth with three straight losses.

Not that the signs weren't there. Particularly, beating North Carolina just 27-23 (when UNC was starting out 1-5), then struggling with Wake Forest at home (winning just 24-21). You could say maybe they were looking ahead, but FSU beat them 41-14 so it wasn't worth it. Letdown plus losing Duke Johnson set the stage for the next two losses, Virginia Tech (42-24) and at Duke (48-30). The Hurricanes recovered with two wins to go 9-3 and surprisingly it's the defense that collapsed at the end of the season, not the offense. Still, we have to consider the difference in the team without the reliable Johnson at RB.

Key Injuries

With Duke Johnson out, Miami has been a different team, losing a lot of their run/pass balance threat. They also lost a couple of defensive backs in late November and two more defenders are questionable. They should get receiver Phillip Dorsett back, however, but #3 receiver Herb Waters is probably out. Louisville has some questionable players too including interceptions leader Charles Gaines.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Louisville's season: +1 win; Miami FL's season: +2 wins
• Louisville's momentum: -1 win; Miami FL's momentum: -3 wins
• Louisville won final game: YES; Miami FL won final game: YES
• Louisville glad to be there? sort of; Miami FL glad to be there: yes
• Louisville time zones from home: 0; Miami FL time zones from home: 0;
• Louisville coaching situation: stable; Miami FL coaching situation: stable

Louisville had a better season this year, but isn't going to a BCS bowl like last year. Miami had a better season, too, but it didn't feel like it after starting 7-0 and ending up 9-3. Still, Miami has to be a bit more primed for a bowl game given that they haven't gone in the last two years due to opting out among the NCAA investigation.

So far, no one has hired away either team's coach; it seems more of a possibility for Charlie Strong to leave than Al Golden.

Final analysis

When the Strength power rating and Vegas line agree, it's often wise to assume that's just about how the game is going to go. But the adjustments to the yardage estimate failed to collapse the spread down from 14; instead it went up to 22 points! Is Miami due to get blown out against the Cardinals?

Whether it was losing Duke Johnson or letdown by the defense, Miami wasn't the same team in the last four games as it was pre-FSU. The team was about 8 1/2 points worse in the last month and with Johnson gone it doesn't seem like it will get better.

The one thing Miami has going for it is enthusiasm over getting back to the bowl season after a two-year self-imposed absence. Meanwhile Louisville expected another BCS bowl at the very least and ends up in the Russell Athletic Bowl. How many points swing is that?

So we have scenarios ranging from a 3-point Louisville win to a 22-point Louisville win, with a stop in the middle at around 12 points. Does Louisville disappoint and Miami come out strong? Maybe, but we also have to think Teddy Bridgewater wants to put on a good show for the NFL scouts one last time. Miami might be hyped up to be playing, but can they make it happen without Johnson? We keep coming back to that and thinking the answer is no. The Cardinals might not like being at the Russell Athletic Bowl, but Miami is a high-profile opponent that should guard them from letdown.

Prediction:  Louisville 35, Miami FL 24

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Belk Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Cincinnati (9-3) vs. North Carolina (6-6)

Saturday, December 28: Belk Bowl in Charlotte, NC at 3:20 pm EST

Cincinnati Bearcats (9-3) vs. North Carolina Tar Heels (6-6)

These teams have similar offenses, with the same quality running and passing games, and both teams are starting their 2nd string quarterback having lost their starter earlier in the year.

Vegas line/spread: North Carolina by 2 1/2 (over/under 56.5)

North Carolina was favored by 3 over the Bearcats early, and 2 1/2 before game day.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Cincinnati	36%	41%
North Carolina	64%	59%

North Carolina outranks Cincinnati pretty significantly in the Strength power rating (#39 to #56) and in addition to that we're giving them partial home field advantage for playing nearby in Charlotte. Those factors make the game-comparisons lean heavily toward the Tar Heels. Interestingly, a simple comparison (12 games vs. 12 games) yields a result much more favorable to Cincinnati (UNC wins just 57%, and 51% per the spread) than does cross-comparing offenses and defenses (144 x 144 comparisons). Either way, though, the Tar Heels have the edge.

Strength power rating:   North Carolina 32, Cincinnati 24     by Median rating:  UNC 29-27
Cincinnati scoring offense: #58 vs. North Carolina scoring defense: #39
Cincinnati scoring defense: #53 vs. North Carolina scoring offense: #41

With almost 3 points added for home field, the Tar Heels are an 8-point favorite per the Strength power rating, as they outrate the Bearcats in both offense and defense slightly. Note that by median game performance Cincinnati actually ranks higher before HFA is applied; this is essentially because North Carolina is a more "random" team.

Yardage analysis:   Cincinnati 33, North Carolina 29     per-play:   North Carolina 31-28
Yardage differential: Cincinnati #36 vs. North Carolina #48
Cincinnati total offense: #31 vs. North Carolina total defense: #62
Cincinnati total defense: #44 vs. North Carolina total offense: #39

By yardage from scrimmage (corrected for schedule) and yardage alone, Cincinnati comes out on top. The teams' defenses rank about the same, but Cincy's offense is far superior that UNC's in gaining yardage. Given this, we'd expect Cincinnati to outgain the Tar Heels roughly 440 to 420 yards; converted to a score estimate, Cincy is a 4-point favorite here.

On a per-play rather than per-game basis, North Carolina retakes the lead, as they are expected to have a very slim advantage in yards per carry and yards per attempt. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Cincinnati 29, North Carolina 29

• Interceptions: Cincinnati has an interceptions problem, and North Carolina could take advantage. The expected value of that advantage is over 3 points.
• Forced fumbles: Neither team has a major fumbles problem but UNC again has a slight advantage here, equal to around a point.
• Sacks: The sacks expectation is pretty equivalent; both teams might have fewer than average.
• Red zone%: Both teams might have below-average red zone performance, as both teams have very good red zone defense. We dock Cincinnati nearly 4 points and North Carolina just over a point.
• 3rd-down%: Cincinnati should be better on 3rd downs overall; we give them almost 2 points, and deduct about a point from North Carolina.
• Special Teams: ESPN's FPI ratings show Cincinnati as the #100 special teams in the country, and North Carolina #101. Both lose 1.5 points. The Bearcats are below average on punt returns and abysmal on field goals (6 of 15 this season). North Carolina ranks poorly despite having Ryan Switzer who has returned 4 punts for touchdowns, but we trust the rankings are put together intelligently :)

Summary: After adjustments, North Carolina comes out ahead by about 2/10 of a point, pointing to an overtime win, perhaps. Essentially, it's a tossup. Remember we gave UNC home field advantage, and if you take that away Cincy still wins.

When Cincinnati has the ball

Cincinnati rushing offense: #74

North Carolina rushing defense: #73

Cincy used three main rushers and Hosey Williams ended up #1 with 609 yards. North Carolina's rushing defense ranks about the same—below average—so it's a fair matchup. Cincinnati should gain around 150 yards or so.

Cincinnati passing offense: #20	North Carolina passing defense: #43   per att: #51
Cincinnati interceptions thrown ranking: #113	North Carolina interceptions picked ranking: #51
Cincinnati quarterback protection rank: #26	North Carolina pass rush rank: #39

Brendon Kay took over early for the injured Munchie Legaux and has passed for over 3,000 yards with 22 touchdowns. The top receivers are Anthony McClung with 908 yards, Shaq Washington with 749, and Chris Moore with 599 (9 TDs). North Carolina's pass defense isn't particularly great and they'll probably give up about 280 yards.

Cincinnati has had an interception problem this year, but Kay has thrown just 11 picks in 358 attempts which isn't bad. Legaux threw 3 in just 51, and the team has 2 other interceptions so it looks worse than it really is with Kay behind center. Quarterback protection is pretty solid.

When North Carolina has the ball

North Carolina rushing offense: #77

Cincinnati rushing defense: #49

Like Cincinnati, North Carolina is not a run-based team; they don't even have a back over 500 yards as quarterback Marquise Williams leads with 490. Freshman TJ Logan is first among running backs with 456 yards. They should expect to gain around 135 yards in the bowl game.

We should take a closer look at Cincinnati's rushing defense. In raw terms, they rank a stellar #5 in the nation, allowing just 99 yards per game. But look at their schedule: the teams they held to 100 or fewer yards are Purdue (#124 out of 125 teams in raw yardage), Northwestern State (FCS), Miami Ohio (#116), Connecticut (#121), Memphis (#94), SMU (#118), and Houston (#93). When corrected for this schedule laden with teams that either pass all the time or just plain can't run the ball, Cincy is just barely above average at #49. It's a great example of how a national ranking is meaningless unless it is corrected for a team's opponents.

North Carolina passing offense: #26	Cincinnati passing defense: #47   per att: #58
North Carolina interceptions thrown ranking: #39	Cincinnati interceptions picked ranking: #63
North Carolina quarterback protection rank: #39	Cincinnati pass rush rank: #61

Like Cincinnati, North Carolina isn't starting the quarterback who began the year at the helm, as Bryn Renner was lost mid-way through the season. He had 1,765 yards at the time, 10 TDs and 5 interceptions. Since taking over, Marquise Williams has amassed 1,527 yards, 14 TDs, and 6 interceptions. Tight end Eric Ebron (895 yards) and WR Quinshad Davis (724, 10 TDs) are the top receivers. Just as the teams have similar passing offenses, Cincinnati's pass defense is similar to UNC's and the Tar Heels should also have around 280 yards.

UNC is good but not great at avoiding interceptions and sacks, and it changes depending on the quarterback. Williams is a bit more pick-prone but it's close, and he definitely avoids getting sacked better than Renner, 5 times vs. 16 times, another reason why the game should feature few sacks. Cincy's pass rush ranking (#61) contrasts with their raw sack total of 35 (#12 in the nation) since their easy schedule features teams with very bad quarterback protection.

 

Cincinnati's season (9-3)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (2)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (3) to losing teams (2)

1. Purdue  W 42- 7  
   
2. @ Illinois  L 17-45  
   
3. Northwestern St  W 66- 9  
   
4. @ Miami OH  W 14- 0  
   
5. @ South Florida  L 20-26  
   
6. Temple  W 38-20  
   
7. Connecticut  W 41-16  
   
8. @ Memphis  W 34-21  
   
9. SMU  W 28-25  
   
10. @ Rutgers  W 52-17  
    
11. @ Houston  W 24-17  
    
12. #18 Louisville  L 24-31 OT
    

We've said it a couple of times and we will repeat: Cincinnati played a VERY easy schedule this season, and that's a big reason why they went 9-3. Only three teams on their schedule ranked better than #100 in our All-Division Strength power rating, and that includes #75 Illinois who went 4-8.

Cincinnati tried to make a statement with their 42-7 game one win over Purdue, but had to retract it after losing to Illinois 45-17. After two more wins they fell to South Florida, 20-26, their 2nd loss to a losing team; that game followed the tragic loss of offensive lineman Ben Flick in a car accident. After that one game of grieving, Cincy may have been inspired—or they just had an easy schedule, as they beat four more losing teams to stand 7-2.

But their run continued as they defeated Rutgers and Houston, both bowl teams, both on the road. Finally it came to an end against Louisville in overtime. Their schedule was certainly easy but they played three of their best games against their bowl-bound opponents.

North Carolina's season (6-6)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (3)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (6) to losing teams (0)

1. @ #9 South Carolina  L 10-27
   
2. M. Tennessee St  W 40-20
   
3. @ Georgia Tech  L 20-28
   
4. East Carolina  L 31-55
   
5. @ Virginia Tech  L 17-27
   
6. Miami FL  L 23-27
   
7. Boston College  W 34-10
   
8. @ North Carolina St  W 27-19
   
9. Virginia  W 45-14
   
10. @ Pittsburgh  W 34-27
    
11. Old Dominion  W 80-20
    
12. #24 Duke  L 25-27

North Carolina played a much tougher schedule than Cincinnati; in fact, only one team on their slate ranked worse than #100 (Old Dominion) and 9 of the 12 are bowl-bound.

The year didn't look promising at mid-season as North Carolina started 1-5, beating only MTSU 40-20 while losing to South Carolina, East Carolina, and three ACC foes. But they turned things around starting with the 34-10 win over Boston College, and four games later they became bowl-eligible with a ridiculous 80-20 win vs. Old Dominion who is transitioning to the FBS. They fell to ACC runner-up Duke in a very close game to finish 6-6.

Key Injuries

Cincinnati will be missing offensive linemen Sam Longo and Austen Bujnoch, but quarterback Brendon Kay is probable to play after suffering an injury vs. Louisville. For North Carolina, leading receiver Eric Ebron (TE) is listed as questionable as is #3 RB AJ Blue.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Cincinnati's season: +0 wins; North Carolina's season: -2 wins
• Cincinnati's momentum: +1 wins; North Carolina's momentum: +4 wins
• Cincinnati won final game: NO; North Carolina won final game: NO
• Cincinnati glad to be there? probably; North Carolina glad to be there: probably
• Cincinnati time zones from home: 0; North Carolina time zones from home: 0;
• Cincinnati coaching situation: stable; North Carolina coaching situation: stable

Cincinnati had another 9 win season, their sixth in the last 7 years, while North Carolina dropped from 8-4 to 6-6. They're probably glad to being going to a bowl, however, since last year they were on probation. Cincinnati went to the same bowl last year and had some hope of a BCS bowl even late in the season, but that was a small hope as they didn't play Central Florida.

One thing we must note is momentum: North Carolina definitely has some after starting 1-5 and finishing 5-1. Cincinnati also had a long winning streak, and both teams lost their lost game narrowly to at least partially disrupt that momentum.

Final analysis

Only three teams on Cincinnati's schedule are going to a bowl game; only three teams on North Carolina's are not. That's the difference in competition that each team has faced.

Cincinati has basically played just two teams on or above North Carolina's level: Houston and Louisville. They beat the Cougars 24-17 on the road, then lost to the Cardinals 31-24 in overtime at home. The Tar Heels have faced 8 teams as good or better than Cincinnati; they were 2-6, losing to all the teams ranked higher than the Bearcats and beating all the lower-ranked ones.

Cincinnati did lose to two inferior teams, but that was early in the season, before their team drew inspiration from the car crash involving several players. They've played 5 or 6 points better since then, which could cut our spread down to two points for the Tar Heels.

But if we cherry-pick for the Bearcats we should do the same for the Tar Heels; since their winning streak started they've been 6 points better, too. Do we restore the estimate to 8 points? Keep it at 2?

We'll split the difference. Given the teams' schedules we have to think North Carolina is better prepared to face another bowl team, and also a little bit hungrier after not going to a bowl game last year.

Prediction:  North Carolina 28, Cincinnati 23

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Pinstripe Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Notre Dame (8-4) vs. Rutgers (6-6)

Saturday, December 28: Pinstripe Bowl in New York, NY at noon EST

Notre Dame Fighting Irish (8-4) vs. Rutgers Scarlet Knights (8-4)

This should be a walk in the park for the Irish, but sometimes bowls that are supposed to be that way, aren't.

Vegas line/spread: Notre Dame by 14 (over/under 53.5)

Vegas heavily favors Notre Dame in this game, by more than two touchdowns. It's one of the biggest spreads of the bowl season, and for good reason. Just before game day the line had softened to 14 points.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Notre Dame	83%	56%
Rutgers	17%	44%

Rutgers ranks only #107 among all teams of all divisions in our Strength power rating (they are #94 among FBS-only). Notre Dame isn't nearly as good as they were last year but still ranks #32. This is a mismatch, and 5 out of 6 game-comparisons fall Notre Dame's way. We even favor the Irish against the spread—and that's after giving Rutgers home field advantage, which is debatable.

Strength power rating:   Notre Dame 35, Rutgers 17     by Median rating:  Notre Dame 34-17
Notre Dame scoring offense: #47 vs. Rutgers scoring defense: #105
Notre Dame scoring defense: #28 vs. Rutgers scoring offense: #122

Once again, the rankings are opponent-adjusted and for all divisions; in the FBS, Rutgers' offense is #93 and their defense is #94, but that's low enough that many FCS teams rank ahead of them. Notre Dame is much better in both categories, needless to say, and that's what leads to the 18-point expected margin. That's after spotting Rutgers nearly 3 points for playing close to home in New York. Facing Notre Dame, however, it's hard to call Rutgers the home team as the Irish have a very national fanbase.

Yardage analysis:   Notre Dame 34, Rutgers 20     per-play:   Notre Dame 38, Rutgers 17
Yardage differential: Notre Dame #40 vs. Rutgers #93
Notre Dame total offense: #44 vs. Rutgers total defense: #82
Notre Dame total defense: #45 vs. Rutgers total offense: #92

Rutgers' rankings here are better because they are FBS-only rankings, but they're still abysmal and cut the expected margin to two touchdowns. If the yardage projection is valid the Irish will gain around 450 yards to Rutgers' 350 or so. The per-play estimate yields the biggest margin yet. 

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Notre Dame 42, Rutgers 18

• Interceptions: Turnovers could give Rutgers a chance but the Knights throw even more than the Irish; the interception data (passes defended) favors Notre Dame slightly, by about a point.
• Forced fumbles: Based on these teams' history this season, neither will have a lot of fumbles so this category is unimportant in terms of predictions.
• Sacks: Notre Dame almost never gives up sacks and doesn't get a lot on defense, so totals should be low for both teams. Notre Dame might get 2 to Rutgers' 1, and we give the Irish a little over 1 point here.
• Red zone%: Rutgers' red zone play is poor, giving Notre Dame an expected 2 1/2 points and docking the Knights about 1 1/2.
• 3rd-down%: Yet another edge for Notre Dame. We give them 2 points and deduct almost as much from Rutgers.
• Special Teams: Notre Dame is #17 in special teams according to ESPN advanced stats, worth +2.1 points. Rutgers actually has the edge here, however, as they rank #15, +2.2 points.

Summary: With every category falling Notre Dame's way—except for virtual ties in fumbles and special teams—the Irish become a huge favorite at 24 points.

When Notre Dame has the ball

Notre Dame rushing offense: #53

Rutgers rushing defense: #19

Cam McDaniel and George Atkinson III lead the Irish in rushing, combining for 1,179 yards. Rutgers does have a strong rushing defense, though, and should hold Notre Dame to about 125 yards, particularly with the Irish missing a few starting offensive lineman.

Notre Dame passing offense: #37	Rutgers passing defense: #123   per att: #114
Notre Dame interceptions thrown ranking: #91	Rutgers interceptions picked ranking: #106
Notre Dame quarterback protection rank: #2	Rutgers pass rush rank: #28

Tommy Rees passed for almost 3,000 yards so far as a senior, with 27 touchdowns. He completed just 53% however and threw 13 interceptions. Against Rutgers' terrible pass defense, however, he might have a field day. TJ Jones (1,042 yards) and DaVaris Daniels (720) lead the Irish receivers, and the team could have well over 300 yards through the air.

Rees' interception woes won't be as much of an issue against Rutgers. The Scarlet Knights do have a quality pass rush, with 32 sacks on the year, but Rees has been sacked just 8 times all year. The absence of Nick Martin and Chris Watt from the O-line could make things easier for Rutgers.

When Rutgers has the ball

Rutgers rushing offense: #100

Notre Dame rushing defense: #44

Rutgers' ground game isn't very strong, but Paul James managed 833 yards and Justin Goodwin is #2 with 518. The Irish defense is good enough to limit them to about 100 yards after sack yardage is accounted for.

Rutgers passing offense: #52	Notre Dame passing defense: #52   per att: #23
Rutgers interceptions thrown ranking: #119	Notre Dame interceptions picked ranking: #68
Rutgers quarterback protection rank: #98	Notre Dame pass rush rank: #110

Gary Nova led the Knights most of the season, passing for just over 2,000 yards and 18 touchdowns. He also had 14 interceptions and a low completion rate and was replaced by Chas Dodd for the last two games. Dodd has 712 yards and the year and just 2 TDs vs. 3 interceptions. Only one receiver, Tyler Kroft, topped 500 yards though several others are in the 400s range. Notre Dame's defense is a good match for Rutgers' passing offense, both ranking #52 in per-game adjusted yardage; the Knights should have around 250 yards.

Dodd is a bit less interception-prone than Dodd, and has been sacked just 6 times compared to 25 for Nova (who has 3x as many attempts). Still, most of Dodd's reps were against UConn and USF, hardly the toughest tests.

 

Notre Dame's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (5)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (2)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Temple  W 28- 6
   
2. @ Michigan  L 30-41
   
3. @ Purdue  W 31-24
   
4. #4 Michigan St  W 17-13
   
5. #11 Oklahoma  L 21-35
   
6. = #14 Arizona St  W 37-34
   
7. Southern Cal  W 14-10
   
8. @ Air Force  W 45-10
   
9. Navy  W 38-34
   
10. @ Pittsburgh  L 21-28
    
11. Brigham Young  W 23-13
    
12. @ Stanford  L 20-27

The thing that stands out in Notre Dame's season is how few games they won in a convincing fashion. Yes, they beat several good teams: 11-1 Michigan State, 17-13; 10-3 Arizona State, 37-34; USC, 14-10; and BYU, 23-13. But those were all narrow wins, as were Navy (38-24) and even 1-11 Purdue (31-24).

They kept it close in losses, too, but the Michigan defeat looks worse than it did at the time, and the Pitt upset came out of nowhere, just when it looked like the Irish were starting to gain some traction. It's usually cringeworthy when people talk about a team not having an "identity" as if that helps teams win, but it kind of applies to Notre Dame this year. They certainly don't seem to have a killer instinct, which makes one wonder if they'll have the fire in them to put Rutgers away convincingly.

Rutgers's season (6-6)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (0)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (6) to losing teams (1)

1. @ #20 Fresno St  L 51-52 OT
   
2. Norfolk St  W 38- 0
   
3. Eastern Michigan  W 28-10
   
4. Arkansas  W 28-24
   
5. @ SMU  W 55-52 3OT
   
6. @ #18 Louisville  L 10-24
   
7. Houston  L 14-49
   
8. Temple  W 23-20
   
9. Cincinnati  L 17-52
   
10. @ #15 Central Florida  L 17-41
    
11. @ Connecticut  L 17-28
    
12. South Florida  W 31- 6

Rutgers somehow made a bowl game playing like one of the worse teams in the nation at times. The key was their early stretch in which they beat four losing teams and only needed to go 2-5 to reach the 6-win mark.

The overtime loss against Fresno State wasn't bad, as the Bulldogs didn't lose again for another 10 games. At 4-1 things looked pretty good but they couldn't beat the better AAC teams, losing to Louisville 24-10 and Houston 49-14. After beating Temple they lost three straight including a 28-17 loss to 3-9 Connecticut in Chas Dodd's first start. They needed a win over 2-10 South Florida to become bowl-eligible and they got it, 31-6—their best performance since the Fresno opener.

Key Injuries

Notre Dame will be without starting offensive lineman Chris Watt, potentially affecting their running game and excellent QB protection. Center Nick Martin was lost a few games ago, and Christian Lombard at mid-season, so this could be significant in limiting Notre Dame's offense. Notre Dame has also lost several players on defense and a few d-backs are listed as questionable.

The Scarlet Knights have lost a lot of (mostly minor) players lately and a#3 receiver Leonte Carroo is doubtful, as is D-back Tejay Johnson.

More than players, the teams will each be missing several coaches. The Irish have seen defensive coordinator Bobby Diaco hired to take over at UConn and offensive coordinator Chuck Martin hired to coach Miami of Ohio. Meanwhile Rutgers has fired three assistants.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Notre Dame's season: -4 wins; Rutgers's season: -3 wins
• Notre Dame's momentum: +0 wins; Rutgers's momentum: -2 wins
• Notre Dame won final game: NO; Rutgers won final game: YES
• Notre Dame glad to be there? NO; Rutgers glad to be there: maybe
• Notre Dame time zones from home: 1; Rutgers time zones from home: 0;
• Notre Dame coaching situation: stable; Rutgers coaching situation: hot seat

Both teams seasons were a drop from last year. Notre Dame was 12-0 and Rutgers 9-3. But in terms of this bowl game, Notre Dame has to be a bit less than enthusiastic about it after playing for the national championship last year. Rutgers had to win their last game to make it, so at least they are thankful to be in the post-season, period.

On the other hand, Rutgers' season is a disappointment after starting 4-1. And coach Kyle Flood had to fire several assistants, which is often the sign of a sinking ship. Rutgers' motivation in a game they are clearly expected to lose can be questioned. But so, then, can Notre Dame's motivation and possible overconfidence.

Final analysis

The fundamental question of this game is: will Notre Dame be overconfident? Because that's really the only way the Irish can lose this game. If they come in fired up to win and knowing they have to take Rutgers seriously, they will win easily. But if they are jaded about this minor bowl (compared to last year's national title game) and thinking Rutgers isn't a worthy opponent, then the Scarlet Knight have a chance to win as long as they feel fired up to play.

We doubt the Irish will lose this game. They managed to beat (almost) everyone they were supposed to, and they though they may be flat, they probably won't be flat enough to lose. Rutgers probably won't be fired up enough to win. So now the question becomes, how convincing will Notre Dame's win be?

Here, we don't see a huge victory in the works. Just looking at Notre Dame's season, the Irish do just enough to win—whether the opponent is good or bad—and no more. They have one blowout to their credit, against 2-10 Air Force. It's not too hard to see them sleepwalking through this game, because they can, and still get the win. It doesn't help that their offensive line is fragmented which could keep their offense in check.

Conditions would be ripe for Rutgers to pull off an upset if they were any better of a team, or if they had shown any kind of spark themselves (beating USF doesn't count). Even at their best—which they reached in all of 2 games—they are a couple points shy of Notre Dame's level. We see them maybe starting a bit stronger than expected, putting a bit of a scare into the Irish, and hanging around for a while until Notre Dame creates the distance they need to secure the win.

Prediction:  Notre Dame 27, Rutgers 17

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.

2013 Fight Hunger Bowl Preview, Odds, & Prediction: Washington (8-4) vs. BYU (8-4)

Friday, December 27: Fight Hunger Bowl in San Francisco, CA at 9:30 pm EST

Washington Huskies (8-4) vs. BYU Cougars (8-4)

This is a great game between two top-25 quality teams.

Vegas line/spread: Washington by 4 1/2 (over/under 65)

The early line bounced between 3 and 3 1/2 points and on gameday was at 4 1/2 for Wasington. The over/under rose a couple of points from the open, from 58 /2 to 60 1/2, then took a leap to 65 by game day.

Game-comparisons	win %	vs. Spread
Washington	64%	58%
BYU	36%	42%

Washington is in the top ten in our Strength power rating, sitting at #9 currently. BYU isn't bad, either, ranking #23, but that still means Washington wins the majority of game comparisons, even against the spread.

Strength power rating:   Washington 32, BYU 23     by Median rating:  Washington 30-25
Washington scoring offense: #14 vs. BYU scoring defense: #22
Washington scoring defense: #11 vs. BYU scoring offense: #35

Both teams have strong defenses, but Washington's edge is that their offense is just as good, and that gives them a 9-point advantage according to our power rating. By median game performance, the Huskies are a 5-point favorite.

Yardage analysis:   Washington 42, BYU 31     per-play:   Washington 34, BYU 24
Yardage differential: Washington #4 vs. BYU #17
Washington total offense: #6 vs. BYU total defense: #46
Washington total defense: #13 vs. BYU total offense: #13

If yardage were always converted into points, Washington would be one of the very top teams in the nation as they rank an adjusted #4 in yardage differential. BYU, too, looks great on the yardage front, ranking #17. The difference between the Washington offense and BYU defense is greater here, and correspondingly the score projection yields nearly an 11-point margin. Under this scenario the Huskies top 500 yards of total offense while BYU exceeds 400.

Adjustments to yardage estimate:   Washington 50, BYU 28

• Interceptions: Neither team is expected to have more than an average number of picks; BYU gains about 2/10 of a point here.
• Forced fumbles: Washington rarely forces fumbles and BYU rarely coughs up the ball, so the Cougars get a 2 point advantage.
• Sacks: Both teams are vulnerable to sacks, each ranking 100+ in sacks allowed, while Washington also has a great pass rush and might have 4 sacks to BYU's 3; we give them around 1 1/2 points edge.
• Red zone%: Washington gains an advantage in red zone play, as they rank #4 in red zone offense. We add over 6 points for the Huskies and dock BYU about a point.
• 3rd-down%: The Huskies are better on 3rd down than BYU, too, and they also rank #4 in 3rd down conversions adjusted for opposition. It could be worth about 2.5 points for Washington and subtract around 2 points from BYU.
• Special Teams: Both teams have above-average special teams, but Washington's is a little better according to ESPN advanced stats; they gain 1.29 to BYU's 0.23.

Summary: Suddenly the game has jumped from a moderate-scoring, fairly close game to a high-scoring almost-blowout. The possibility does exist for a big Washington win, but we didn't think the numbers and adjustments would predict it; normally the adjustments tend to move the victory margin closer to the Strength power rating's prediction and toward the Vegas line, but this time it went big in the opposite direction.

When Washington has the ball

Washington rushing offense: #13

BYU rushing defense: #36

Bishop Sankey was one of the top running backs in college football this year, gaining 1,775 yards and scoring 18 touchdowns. He'll be a challenge for BYU's decent rushing defense; look for Washington to have over 200 yards on the ground.

Washington passing offense: #25	BYU passing defense: #65   per att: #24
Washington interceptions thrown ranking: #17	BYU interceptions picked ranking: #78
Washington quarterback protection rank: #105	BYU pass rush rank: #57

Keith Price had a good 2013 season, racking up 2,843 yards and 20 touchdowns with just 5 interceptions. Surprisingly his top targets were Kevin Smith (722 yards) and Jaydon Mickens (681) rather than tight end Austin Sefarian-Jenkins (who had 413 this season). Kasen Williams finished #3 after a season-ending injury in October. BYU's pass defense is a bit weak, but on a per-play basis they aren't bad so it's hard to predict. Based on these numbers, Washington might approach 300 yards through the air.

Price has only been picked off 5 times this year so it's unlikely for interceptions to be a big factor. However, Washington is vulnerable to quarterback pressure in a big way as Price has been sacked 27 times.

When BYU has the ball

BYU rushing offense: #9

Washington rushing defense: #47

The Cougars are an even better rushing team than the Huskies, with a one-two punch of QB Taysom Hill and RB Jamaal Williams, both sophomores who have just over 1,200 yards each. That's each, not combined. Washington's rushing defense is good but not great, and the Huskies will definitely have some trouble containing both runners; expect BYU to gain over 250 yards on the ground.

BYU passing offense: #73	Washington passing defense: #7   per att: #6
BYU interceptions thrown ranking: #72	Washington interceptions picked ranking: #43
BYU quarterback protection rank: #103	Washington pass rush rank: #13

For decades BYU football was synonymous with passing offense; not so this year. QB Hill has thrown for 2,645 yards and 19 touchdowns but not without some difficulty, including a 54% completion rate and 13 interceptions. Senior Cody Hoffman (727 yards) is the only receiver above 500 yards, but four others have 200 or more.

Washington's pass defense is actually terrific, however—once you correct for the incredible passing teams they've faced. The Huskies are just #49 in raw figures, but they've faced the likes of Oregon State, Washington State, Cal, Oregon, and Arizona State. Boise State and UCLA aren't bad, and  even Colorado and Illinois are good passing teams. The team's #6 per-play stat backs up the per-game figure. They should hold BYU under 200 yards.

BYU is fairly vulnerable to interceptions, but as with Washington's offense the real problem is sacks. The Cougars have given up 33 sacks this year, and it's even worse since the Huskies have a top pass rush led by Hai'oli Kikaha who has 10. Hill will be running a lot anyway, but some of that running will be attempting to dodge Husky defenders behind the line of scrimmage.

 

Washington's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (4)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (0)

1. Boise St  W 38- 6
   
2. @ Illinois  W 34-24
   
3. Idaho St  W 56- 0
   
4. Arizona  W 31-13
   
5. @ #5 Stanford  L 28-31
   
6. #10 Oregon  L 24-45
   
7. @ #14 Arizona St  L 24-53
   
8. California  W 41-17
   
9. Colorado  W 59- 7
   
10. @ #17 UCLA  L 31-41
    
11. @ Oregon St  W 69-27
    
12. Washington St  W 27-17

Washington showed a lot of promise early but ultimately couldn't win big games, limiting their bowl opportunities despite being one of the country's best teams at times. They beat Boise very convincingly 38-6 but the Broncos had a down year (for them). The 24-14 Illinois win proved to be a non-event in the long run, while the 41-13 Arizona win is expected of a good team.

The lynchpin game was at Stanford, where Washington lost controversially by a field goal, 31-28. After that they couldn't handle Oregon (45-24) and dropped a third straight game at Arizona State, 53-24. With their season falling out of control they got what they needed in the form of Pac-12 whipping boys California and Colorado, whom they beat by a combined 100-24. UCLA was another key challenge and they failed on the road, 41-31, but they got two more bowl-team wins against Oregon State (69-27) and rival Washington State 27-17.

In the end Washington only lost to very good teams, all consensus top 25, but didn't demonstrate they were worthy of the top 25 themselves.

BYU's season (8-4)

Wins vs. bowl-eligible teams (6)
Wins vs. BCS Top 25 teams (0)
Losses (4) to losing teams (2)

1. @ Virginia  L 16-19
   
2. Texas  W 40-21
   
3. Utah  L 13-20
   
4. M. Tennessee St  W 37-10
   
5. @ Utah St  W 31-14
   
6. Georgia Tech W 38-20
   
7. @ Houston  W 47-46
   
8. Boise St  W 37-20
   
9. @ #19 Wisconsin  L 17-27
   
10. Idaho St  W 59-13
    
11. @ Notre Dame  L 13-23
    
12. @ Nevada  W 28-23

BYU's early season was marked by unpredictability. Can we explain how the Cougars lost to 2-10 Virginia 19-16, then turned around to beat 8-4 Texas 40-21? Then they lost to Utah 20-13 at home.

They hit their stride in mid-season, however, beating five straight bowl teams: MTSU (37-10), Utah State (31-14), Georgia Tech (38-20), Houston (47-46), and Boise State (37-20). The Houston win was that team's first loss. They dropped road games to tough opponents Wisconsin (27-17) and Notre Dame (23-13) to finish 8-4.

Note the two common opponents, Boise State and Idaho State. Washington beat both teams worse, Boise by 32 vs. 17 and Idaho State by 56 vs. 46.

Key Injuries

Both teams are missing key receivers, with Washington's #3 Kasen Williams and BYU's #3 Mitch Mathews out for the year, but both have had time to adjust without them, though BYU will probably be without Ross Apo too. BYU starting right tackle Brock Stringham will also miss the game, which could impact BYU's ability to run the ball. The Cougars also list a couple of defensive players as questionable.

Psychology/Motivation - Some (unscientific) factors that may come into play during the game:

• Washington's season: +1 win; BYU's season: +1 win
• Washington's momentum: +0 wins; BYU's momentum: +0 wins
• Washington won final game: YES; BYU won final game: YES
• Washington glad to be there? maybe; BYU glad to be there: yes
• Washington time zones from home: 0; BYU time zones from home: 1;
• Washington coaching situation: coach left; BYU coaching situation: stable

There's not too much here until we get to the coaching situation. Both teams improved very slightly from last year—for Washington, it marks the first time they've had 8 wins since 2001. Washington may have had their sights set on a bigger bowl, but after the three mid-season losses they knew they were lower in the Pac-12 pecking order. Meanwhile, BYU was locked into the Fight Hunger Bowl in the pre-season, so whether they were 6-6 or 10-2 they'd be here.

As everyone knows, Steve Sarkisian was hired away by USC after five years at Washington. The Huskies hired Boise State's Chris Petersen to take over, but the bowl game will be coached by former starting quarterback Marques Tuiasosopo, who led them to a great 2000 season where they finished 11-1—the last time they've topped 8 wins. The players seem to be handling it pretty well and focusing on the bowl game, so any negative effect might be small.

Final analysis

We went into this review expecting to project a close game, maybe a bit above or below the spread, and maybe a BYU upset win. After all, the Cougars have shown the ability to win games where they were the underdog (Texas, for example). And the Huskies haven't really defeated any great teams—Arizona might be their best conquest.

But going through the review process the numbers fell heavily on Washington's side. And the Cougars haven't defeated a great team, just several good ones. Texas finished 8-4, and Georgia Tech and Utah State are very good also.

The winner of this game can lay claim to being truly top 25-worthy. We have to think that Washington, being a top-ten quality team in theory, should be able to prevail over BYU. Since we don't think the coaching change affected the team much we'll go with a convincing win.

Prediction:  Washington 42, BYU 28

More previews, odds, and predictions: View the complete 2013-2014 bowl game schedule.