Monday, January 05, 2009

Football Bias Against the Best (West) Coast

At dinner over the break I had to suffer listening to an Italian talk about how the 49ers were one of the worst NFL organizations. Que? If my memory serves, the 49ers share with the Pittsburgh Steelers the crown for most NFL championships with five. The Cowboys are next with four. These are the three best NFL organizations historically. The Giants, Patriots, and Dolphins are very respectable and could arguably be put in the first tier. Below that, the Colts, the Packers, the Bears, the Broncos, and a host of other teams are also good, but not in the first tier. (ps - I'm talking NFL post AFC and the Super Bowl, no ancient history).

Coupled with the bowl and playoff results, there is a phenomenon to explain this lazy thinking - a bias against West Coast Football. Because football is revered in the Midwest and South, it does not follow they are better at it.

Example #1 - The Pac 10. The whole year we had to listen to ESPN and the college football experts berate the Pac 10 as weak. The reason USC wasn't even close to the national championship game was because of their Pac 10 schedule (despite being the best college football organization in ages) and their one loss to a surprisingly good Oregan State team. What happens? The Pac 10 goes 5-0 in bowl games. USC crushes the best Big 10 school, Penn St. To put it in perspective, USC barely played in the 2nd half and still won without breaking a sweat. Oregon beats a top Big 12 school (supposedly a top conference), and Cal takes down a Florida school. Some weakness.

Example #2 - The Chargers. If the Colts won the coin flip and went down to win in OT, the press would saying "I told you so!" Norv Turner sucks! LT is weak and old! San Diego can't win a big game. Instead, they beat the best quarterback in football, the good 'ole boy Peyton Manning two years in a row.

Example #3 - Arizona Cardinals. Prior to the playoffs, the rumor was they were the worst team in playoff history. Now we know they are at least second worst.

Example #4 - Do the math...Ohio State had Texas beat tonight if they knew how to manage the clock. Easy runs over tackles. Go down and run off time and win with a field goal if necessary. But they left too much time on the clock and Texas (barely) came back and won. Texas is a team many though should be playing for the National Championship can barely beat Ohio State. USC beat Ohio State this year, 35-3. Are you kidding me?

Example #5 - The rigged South. Big 12 was the "best" conference this year. Why? Because a whole bunch of their teams were in the top 10 - Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, ranked in the top 10 at different times. All these teams loss to one another and it was assumed they were ALL good and beating up on each other. Guess what? Turns out another theory is possible: they were all weak. A systemic bias in the BCS emerged - the whole notion of strength of schedule. What if the teams are tagged incorrectly? What system is there for correction once a bias is put in place? The system got all turned around. The Pac 10 beat up on each other, causing the system to reason the conference was weak and the system reinforced it's own bias as the Big 12 all lost to each other.

Example #6 - Utah. The whole reason we got a BCS system was to allow a team like Utah to compete for the National Championship. They were the only undefeated division 1 team. The logic of the BCS was to get an undisputed national champion. But the way the chips fell this year, with all the big teams suffering a loss, the so many teams were eligible for the #1 slot, it became a toss up. Oklahoma, Florida, USC, Penn St, Texas, Alabama all had as a good a reason as the others to think they could be playing for the championship. Only Utah has an indisputable claim. So what happens? The system uses "strength of schedule," aka bias, to conclude Florida-Oklahoma deserve the game. The consolation - Alabama can whip up on Utah just to prove the system was smart and the two best teams get to play. Only problem was that Utah didn't just beat Alabama in fluke, Boise St, style miracle. They ass-raped Alabama from minute one.

I gotta give props to Florida because those guys show up in bowl games. But do you see how USC wins games? They win while playing shitty and not even using half their talent. Sanchez can't develop into a QB because he doesn't get challenged. I remember in college often times in scrimmage the first team would lose to the backups in practice. The first team had trouble getting pumped up and the back ups would play their hearts out. This is USC every year in every game. It makes them soft, I know. They aren't gutty. But if USC played Florida and I had to bet...I mean, USC's defense allowed 7 points per game this year, it'd be USC for sure, dude. For sure.

And I'd take the 1985 or 1989 Niners over anyone. Period.

No comments: