The Anatomy of a Win: How KSU Beat OU in Norman

On Tuesday, I presented the case about why Notre Dame might not be doomed to fail against Oklahoma.  I presented the argument that not only has Notre Dame not been susceptible to the big play but that Oklahoma’s efficient offense is not necessarily explosive.  I followed up by suggesting that red zone efficiency will be a much larger factor in the game on Saturday.  I wanted to take at least an anecdotal look at this to see whether the argument holds.  Since the Sooners have lost just once this year, it makes sense to evaluate how KSU’s defense held OU to less than 20 points. 

Below is a drive-by-drive analysis for the Sooners.  We’re all aware of what 3^rd down efficiency means.  It’s the number of times that a team is able to successfully convert a third down into a first down.  For a team like Oklahoma that seems to be more efficient than explosive, the notion of moving the chains is all the more important.  I’ve taken each drive and broken it down play-by-play.  Each play is evaluated for efficiency using some of the measures which the incredibly smart people at Football Outsiders use to measure play-by-play efficiency.  My method is a bit more crude, and yes, sample size is a factor, but efficiency was measured under the following parameters:

1.  Plays deemed efficient will appear in green.
2.  Plays deemed inefficient will appear in red.
3.  Scoring plays are marked in blue and are always considered efficient.
4.  A 1^st down play is deemed efficient if the play gains at least one-third of the remaining yards to go to achieve a first down.
5.  A 2^nd down play is deemed efficient if the play gains at least one-half of the remaining yards to go to achieve a first down.
6.  A 3^rd (or 4^th) down play is deemed efficient if the play gains 100% of the total yards needed to achieve a first down.
7.  A play can be efficient that results in a turnover.  It’s the yardage that we’re looking at.
8.  A punt or field goal is not deemed to be either.
9.  A play that has a penalty can be both efficient and inefficient at the same time.  However, a penalty which happens pre-snap is determined to be inefficient when scored against the offense.

Got it?  No, well, okay then….Let’s get to the drive summaries anyways:

FIRST QUARTER:

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 9	1		7
Own 16	2	4
Own 20	1	10
Own 30	1	8
Own 38	2		4
Own 42	1	11
Opp  47	1	5
Opp. 42	2		0
Opp. 42	3		14
Opp. 28	1		0
Opp. 28	2		10	9
Opp. 9	1		0
Opp. 9	2	-2
Opp. 11	3		0
Opp. 11	4				FG – 3pts.

Total Yards Gained:  80

Efficient Plays:  9/14 =  64%

Inefficient Plays:  5/14 = 36%

Points:  3

Red Zone?:  Yes

Red Zone TD:  No

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 18	1		3
Own 21	2	5
Own 26	3	1
Own 27	4				Punt

Total Yards Gained:  9
Efficient Plays:  1/3 = 33%

Inefficient Plays:  2/3 = 67%

Points:  0

Red Zone?:  No

FIRST QUARTER TOTALS:

Plays:  17

Efficient:  59% (10/17)

Inefficient:  41% (7/17)

Points:  3

Red Zone Attempts:  1

Red Zone TD’s:  0

SECOND QUARTER:

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 16	1			-5
Own 11	1	2
Own 13	2		0
Own 13	3	-11			Lost Fumble

Total Yards Gained:  -15

Efficient Plays:  0/4 = 0%

Inefficient Plays:  4/4 = 100%

Points:  0

Red Zone?  No

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 40	1	2
Own 42	2		13
Opp. 45	1	1
Opp. 44	2		24
Opp. 20	1		0
Opp. 20	2		11
Opp. 9	1	8
Opp. 1	2	-5			Lost Fumble

Total Yards Gained:  54

Efficient Plays:  4/8 = 50%

Inefficient Plays:  4/8 = 50%

Points:  0

Red Zone?  Yes

Red Zone TD?  No

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 25	1		3
Own 28	2		0
Own 28	3		19
Own 47	1		14
Opp. 39	1		21
Opp. 18	1		0
Opp. 18	2		1
Opp. 17	3		0
Opp. 17	4				FG – 3 pts.

Total Yards Gained:  58

Efficient Plays:  3/8 = 38%

Inefficient Plays:  5/8 = 62%

Points:  3

Red Zone?  Yes

Red Zone TD?  No

SECOND QUARTER TOTALS:

Plays:  20

Efficient:  35% (7/20)

Inefficient:  65% (13/20)

Points:  3

Red Zone Attempts:  2

Red Zone TD’s:  0

THIRD QUARTER:

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 25	1	8
Own 33	2	10
Own 43	1		0
Own 43	2	2
Own 45	3		0
Own 45	4			-5
Own 40	4				Punt

Total Yards Gained:  15
Efficient Plays:  2/6 = 33%

Inefficient Plays:  4/6 = 67%

Points:  0

Red Zone? No

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 12	1		0
Own 12	2		10
Own 22	1	6
Own 28	2		6
Own 34	1		16
50	1		9
Opp. 41	2		27
Opp. 14	1	5
Opp. 9	2		7
Opp. 2	1	-1
Opp. 3	2	3			TD

Total Yards Gained:  88

Efficient Plays:  8/11 = 73%

Inefficient Plays:  3/11 = 27%

Points:  7

Red Zone?  Yes

Red Zone TD?  Yes

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 4	1	2
Own 6	2		10
Own 16	1		6
Own 22	2		Interception

Total Yards Gained:  18

Efficient Plays:  2/4 = 50%

Inefficient Plays:  2/4 = 50%

Points:  0

Red Zone?  No

THIRD QUARTER TOTALS:           

Plays:  21

Efficient:  57% (12/21)

Inefficient:  43% (9/21)

Points:  7

Red Zone Attempts:  1

Red Zone TD’s:  1

FOURTH QUARTER

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 35	1	4		-10
Own 29	1		0
Own 29	2		9
Own 38	3		0
Own 38					Punt

Total Yards Gained:  3

Efficient Plays:  2/5 = 40%

Inefficient Plays:  3/5 = 60%

Points:  0

Red Zone?  No

Yard Line:	Down:	Run:	Pass:	Penalty:	Other:
Own 35	1		8
Own 43	2	4
Own 47	1	-8
Own 39	2		9
Own 48	3		17
Opp. 35	1	11
Opp. 24	1		0
Opp. 24	2	4
Opp. 20	3		10
Opp. 10	1		10		TD

Total Yards Gained:  65

Efficient Plays:  7/10 = 70%

Inefficient Plays:  3/10 = 30%

Points:  6 (missed 2 pt. attempt)

Red Zone?  Yes

Red Zone TD?  Yes

FOURTH QUARTER TOTALS:

Plays:  15

Efficient:  60% (9/15)

Inefficient:  40% (6/15)

Points:  7

Red Zone Attempts:  1

Red Zone TD’s:  1

GAME TOTALS:

Plays:  73

Efficient:  52%  (38/73)

Inefficient:  48%  (35/73)

Points:  19

Red Zone Attempts:  5

Red Zone TD’s:  2

Efficiency Passing:  56% (24/43)

Efficiency Running: 56% (15/27)

Efficiency 1^st Down:  50%

Efficiency 2^nd Down:  71%

Efficiency 3^rd Down:  40%

Penalties:  3

Red Zone Attempts:  5

Red Zone Scoring Percentage:  80%

Red Zone TD Percentage:  40%

Turnover Differential: - 3

Longest Pass Play:  27

Longest Rush Play:  11

Plays From Scrimmage 25+:  1 (pass, 27)

OBSERVATIONS:

Let’s get the obvious out of the way.  It cannot be understated how important the +3 turnover differential was in this case.  The largest being a turnover by Oklahoma on the KSU 1 yard line.  That possession for those that have looked at the data from Tuesday is the only time this season that Oklahoma has failed to score some points in the opponent’s red zone.

Oklahoma had 2 touchdowns in this game.  Their two touchdowns coincided with the only two drives of the game where over 70% of their plays on the drive were deemed efficient.  Oklahoma did not score quickly at any point.  Each drive was methodical, and it was only when over 70% of their drive plays were efficient that they could finally break into the Wildcat end zone.

What this game does suggest is that my data from Tuesday could very well be on point.  Oklahoma reached the red zone 5 times.  Their season average is 5.5 times a game.  However, they scored on only 80% of their drives which reached the red zone (Season Average:  96.97%).  They scored a touchdown when reaching the red zone on 40% of their possessions (Season Average:  75.76%).  In other words, KSU did exactly what I suggested would be the key to this coming weekend’s game:  They reduced OU’s red zone efficiency even though they didn’t deny them the opportunities.

A second takeaway from this breakdown is that KSU also capitalized on the first point I noted in Tuesday's post.  They kept OU from gaining chunk yardage allowing just one play from scrimmage to amass more than 25 yards.  KSU forced Oklahoma to have long, sustained drives, and this extra effort kept OU from posting a large point total.

Another thing KSU did well:  Oklahoma was only 50% efficient on first downs, and only about half of their plays for the entire game were efficient.  While OU excelled on 2^nd down at either converting or getting their drive to a third and manageable, KSU was able to get OU off the field more frequently on third down than they didn’t.  Taking the 71% efficiency of OU on second down and making that 40% on third down means that KSU was actually pretty exceptional in third down situations.  Notre Dame’s defense needs to take note of this pattern.

Finally, KSU won the position battle.  On 5/11 drives, Oklahoma started from within its own 20 yard line.  Their best starting field position was their own 40.  Having 0 turnovers certainly helped KSU in this respect, but they also played exceptional special teams and constantly put their defense in a position to force OU to drive the length of the field.  All three of Notre Dame’s units need to take notice of this.  It’s a joint effort to flip the field like that so consistently.  KSU was able to win the time of possession battle, and they held OU to just 15 plays (and 2 possessions) in the 4^th quarter with the game on the line.

When I look at this game, it spells recipe for success, and it’s a formula Notre Dame can follow.  KSU passed for just 149 yards in the game.  They gave up 299 through the air.  It wasn’t the absolute yards that made the difference.  It was taking the extra effort to grind OU’s offense and make them work on every play.  Yep, call me a believer.

Notre Dame Meets Its Maker...Or Does It?

            I’m excited…..No, that’s not the right word.  I get excited for a good meal, the rare nights I can fall asleep early, and when my dog doesn’t steal my seat on the couch when I get up to go to the bathroom.  So, no, excited is not the right word.  I sat here for a few moments trying to think of what the correct word would be, and it hasn’t come.  Needless to say, Saturday night means a lot to me. 

            The experts, though, have me nervous.  Since it became official that the Catholics trump the Mormons for another year last Saturday evening and this week’s ND/Oklahoma game became a battle of top 10 teams, all I’ve heard is why the Irish are going to get slaughtered.  The refrains from the experts are typical:  Notre Dame hasn’t played anyone yet (aside:  Yet they love Alabama and Oregon???  Who exactly have those guys played?), our offense stinks (no aside, we haven’t been great), and Oklahoma’s the first real offense we’ve played, and they’re going to take the top off of us.  It’s tough to ignore.  These same comments have been echoed everywhere.  When our best line of media defense is an octogenarian with a lisp and a bias so pungent that I’m convinced I now own a 4D television (note:  I don’t even own a 3D television), my degree of anxiety increases. 

            There are many, many good websites that will provide a breakdown of the game.  They’ll talk about the key match-ups individually, the psychology, Big Game Bob, Big Game Bob at home, ND’s unsettled QB situation, why a Sooner would beat an Irishman in a drinking contest, and who wears a visor better: BK versus Bob, I’m not going to engage in that.  We (pronounced: “me’) here at JLD have decided to look at the statistics to find out exactly what type of butt kicking I should expect on Saturday. 

            So, without further unnecessary lead-in, let’s explore some statistical areas that seem important to this match-up:

1.  OKLAHOMA’S OFFENSE IS GOING TO TORCH ND’S UNTESTED DEFENSE:

            I’ve found this one to be the most troubling.  Even granting that the Sooners are better than some of the other offenses we’ve faced, what data do we have to back up the notion that ND will inevitably be lit up?  Notre Dame’s points allowed per game is second in the nation.  We’ve yet to allow a rushing touchdown, and each of these points have been espoused by anyone feigning to cover college football.  The prevailing thought among the experts is that we’re susceptible to the big play and OU will capitalize, but is that true?  First, let’s look just at long plays from scrimmage allowed by ND on a game-by-game basis.  For purposes of this chart, I’m defining a long play as 25 yards or more from scrimmage on any given play.  These are the “chunk” yardage plays Oklahoma is expected to get:

Table 1:

Notre Dame Defense:  Plays of 25+ Yards/TD’s Allowed 10+ Yards

Opponent:	Rushes 25+ Yards:	Passes 25+ Yards:	TD’s 10+ Yards:
Navy	1 (25)	3 (41, 38, 25)	1 (pass, 25)
Purdue	0	1 (27)	1 (pass 15)
Michigan State	0	0	0
Michigan	1 (31)	0	0
Miami	0	2 (28, 26)	0
Stanford	0	0	0
BYU	0	0	0
TOTALS:	2 (25, 31)	6 (41, 38, 28, 27, 26, 25)	2 (Pass; 25, 15)

·      Number in parentheses indicates number of yards gained

Even a quick look indicates that Notre Dame has not been susceptible to the big play this season.  Navy accounts for exactly half of all plays 25+ yards that ND has allowed.  That game, by the way, Notre Dame won 52-10.  We can summarize as follows:

Longest Rushing Play of the Year:  31 yards (Michigan).  Notre Dame is tied for 9^th in the nation with the longest run surrendered being somewhere between 30-40 yards.

Longest Passing Play of the Year:  41 yards (Navy).  Notre Dame is 2^nd in the nation having allowed only 2 passing plays over 30 yards.  The only team above them, LSU (1 play allowed), permitted that pass to go more than 80 yards.  ND is tied with 8 other teams for first in the nation having allowed just 1 passing play of 40 or more yards. 

Since the Dublin game, Michigan’s 31 yard rush is the only 30+ yard play that the Notre Dame defense has surrendered.

The longest touchdown surrendered:  25 yards.  Oklahoma’s got their work cut out for them if they intend to take ND’s head off.

Much of the conversation has been about how Oklahoma possesses a more potent vertical passing game than the Irish have experienced.  The numbers really don’t back this up.  In FBS competition, OU ranks 89^th in passing plays going for more than 20 yards.  OU’s notched 16 such plays in  5 games (Game Average:  3.2 passes per game).  Notre Dame has notched 25 such plays in 7 games (Game Average:  3.57 passes per game).  For those who may be numbers impaired, Notre Dame averages more passing plays of 20+ yards a game than Oklahoma in FBS competition.  So, do you think ND has a great vertical passing game?  Yeah, neither do I…

Some of the claims about OU’s potent offense also involve their running game and with good reason.  JUCO transfer Damien Williams is averaging 7.46 yards a carry.  Notre Dame’s already gone up against some formidable running backs:  Stepfan Taylor, Le’Veon Bell, and ummm…Navy’s primary means of attack.  While we could address Notre Dame’s rush defense (Top 25 by all statistical measures), the main argument for Oklahoma has been their big play ability.  In terms of absolute numbers, neither Notre Dame nor Oklahoma have been among the elite in terms of big plays.  Let’s compare the two on a per game basis. 

Table 2:

Notre Dame/Oklahoma Plays of 10+ Yards from Scrimmage (FBS Only)

Team:	Plays 10+	Plays 20+	Plays 30+	% of 10+ going 20+	% of 20+ going 30+
ND	13.14	5.29	1.86	14.13	40.22
OU	19	4.4	2	10.53	23.16

            Absolute numbers didn’t make sense in the illustration above given that ND’s played 2 more FBS games than OU.  However, if we do look at absolute numbers as opposed to game averages, Oklahoma’s had 95 plays from scrimmage gaining at least 10 yards.  Notre Dame’s had 92.  Oklahoma’s had 22 plays go for at least 20 yards, 16 of which we previously established were passing plays.  That means that Oklahoma has exactly 6 rushes of 20+ yards.  Notre Dame?  12.  While Oklahoma averages an impressive 6 more plays a game of 10+ yards than the Fighting BK’s, Notre Dame is actually the more likely of the two to have a chunk play of 20-30 yards, and they’re quite similar in terms of 30+ yard plays.  While that 10+ yard play per game difference OU supports is important to moving the chains, it does not necessarily equate to touchdowns.  The next sub-set of statistics really elaborate on the story of why OU appears to be more potent offensively than ND and why there is such a drastic scoring difference.

2.  THE RED ZONE:  BATTLE OF THE UNSTOPPALBE FORCE VS. THE IMMOVEABLE OBJECT:

Despite the lack of difference in big play ability to this point, there has been a distinct and not-so-subtle difference in scoring between ND and Oklahoma.  Blame it on the Big 12 defenses.  Blame it on a difference in quarterback play.  Blame it on the rain.  What might be the reason for this distinct difference?  There’s almost no question that the answer lies in red zone efficiency.

Table 3:

Offensive Red Zone Efficiency Numbers

Team:	Attempts Per Game:	Scoring Percentage:	Touchdown Percentage:
ND	4.86	76.47 (89th)	47.06 (106th)
OU	5.5	96.97 (T-1st)	75.76 (9th)

·      Number in parentheses represents national ranking in category

Not only does Oklahoma get to the red zone a little more frequently than Notre Dame, but they are starkly more efficient once they enter that zone.  For two teams that seem to have similar “big play” potential, it’s Oklahoma’s dominance in red zone offense that has led to so many more scores.  Despite the expert analysis, if you combine Oklahoma’s lack of a substantial number of big plays combined with their red zone efficiency, you paint the picture of an effective, not explosive offense. I’m not trying to sell the Sooners short.  They’re clearly a devastating offense but not in the manner that the experts have painted them.  There is, however, the other side to the equation.   Notre Dame’s allowed exactly 2 touchdowns of more than 10 yards and only 1 touchdown from outside the red zone, meaning, Notre Dame’s red zone defense will  play a central part in the scoring results on Saturday.

Table 4:

Defensive Red Zone Efficiency Numbers

Team:	Attempts Per Game:	Scoring Percentage:	Touchdown Percentage:
ND	2.71	52.63 (3rd)	21.05 (1st)
OU	2.2	72.73 (20th)	54.55 (45th)

·      Number in parentheses represents national ranking in category

Notre Dame’s defense has been astonishingly good at not allowing the touchdown when an offense makes its way to the red zone.  Only 4 times in 19 total attempts has a team which reached Notre Dame’s 20 yard line found a way to make it that final bit and notch a touchdown.  The scoring percentage has certainly been aided by missed field goals (as opposed to blocks),  but the fact remains:  As good as Oklahoma has been at scoring once in the red zone, Notre Dame has been every bit as good at preventing scoring.  Call it luck.  Call it inspiration.  Call it genius. 

The lynch pin of Notre Dame’s defensive strategy this year has been forcing teams to work for every last yard (See:  The Stanford game, regardless of your interpretation of the final play).  They don’t allow big plays, and much like a Catholic on his wedding night, they stiffen in the red zone. 

All of this is not to suggest or predict that Notre Dame will win on Saturday night.  Norman, OK is the most formidable city named Norman I’m aware of.  Moreover, Oklahoma is a very, very good team that many predicted might make the National Title Game this year.  However, before Brian Kelly just turns the plane around and forfeits, perhaps these numbers can provide a concrete reason that this is not a runaway in the making.  Sure, people will point to the home field advantage (it’s a big one), the quarterback differential (it’s a big one), or the battle for turnover supremacy (it’s always, regardless of opponent, a big one).  But for those thinking that OU is an offensive juggernaut destined to rip out the heart of ND Nation, let me encourage you to read the numbers above, take a deep breath, and remember that Las Vegas does not determine the outcome of (most) sporting events. 

My prediction:  Whichever team is more efficient in the red zone will win.  This game will not be decided by the big plays everyone is expecting to rain down upon Notre Dame on Saturday night.

- Moons

Relatively? Relevant

     On Tuesday, it was announced that Notre will join the ACC as a full-time member as soon as they can negotiate a buy-out with the Big East…That is, they’ll join in all sports except football and hockey.  Shockingly, there’s not been a lot of uproar about ND’s failure to join the non-existent ACC hockey conference.  However, the failure of the ACC to negotiate ND’s full-time inclusion in their football conference has, yet again, sparked the controversy about Notre Dame’s relevance on the national football scene.

            There are very few topics in the World of sports that put ink to paper (or ummm….fingers to keyboards?) as much what Notre Dame means to college football.  A few weeks back, Rick Reilly managed to string together a bunch of hackneyed clichés explaining why Notre Dame was no longer relevant in college football.  I refuse to link specifically to that piece because the amount of original thought that went into writing that article was far less, and not even measureable in entertainment value, to the amount of work needed to create the must see movie of the year, Taken 2  The writers over at Her Loyal Sons wrote the best (or at least my favorite) response to Mr. Reilly’s piece.  With a rare free Friday afternoon, I decided to put my own thoughts out there about Notre Dame’s relevance…or lack thereof.

            Let’s start with the best of the arguments against Notre Dame’s relevance:  Performance on the field.  For the ND haters, they will continue to harp on this one point until such time as Notre Dame returns to a National Championship game and possibly beyond that.  There is no disputing that Notre Dame’s performance on the field over the past 20 years or so does not live up to the legend and lore upon which the program was built.  Yes, Notre Dame did appear in a BCS game of some sort in 2001, 2006, and 2007.  The record for Notre Dame in those games?  0-3.  The cumulative score of those games?  Notre Dame: 43, Opponents:  116.  Notre Dame’s best result?  A 14 point loss to Ohio State in the 2006 Fiesta Bowl.  Quite frankly, any rational Notre Dame fan would have to acknowledge that the Irish did not belong on the same field as their opponents on those occasions.  Many will argue that save Notre Dame’s “undeserved” tie-in to the BCS, they would never have received those spots.  The problem with that theory is that Notre Dame only receives an automatic bid if they finish in the Top 8 at the time of selection.  The only time that happened was the 2006 Fiesta Bowl, which was by far their most competitive game and most deserved appearance.  In both 2001 and 2007, Notre Dame was an at-large selection.  The real story of Notre Dame’s relevancy is explained best by the reason  that in both 2001 and 2007 Notre Dame was selected over other schools to go to one of the BCS bowls.

            People can place a spin on college athletics all they want.  For “minor” sports, most of the clichés are true.  It’s sports in its purest form; it’s the embodiment of the “student athlete,” etc., etc.  However, for college football, and to a lesser extent college basketball, these sports are considerable revenue-generators for a lot of different factions.  Schools, coaches, cities, corporate sponsors, the NCAA, conferences, media outlets all stand to gain a lot by selecting nationally intriguing games.  Notre Dame’s rabid, irrational, loyal-to-a-fault fan base continues to make Notre Dame one of, if not the single most, “safe” bet for scheduling purposes.  The fan base for Notre Dame is an unusual and unique group for several reasons. 

            Unlike most schools, Notre Dame’s fan base is truly national.  This is an argument impossible to win with fans from regional powerhouses.   I live in the land of the SEC.  The number of times I’ve listened to folks from Florida, or Alabama, or Georgia, or South Carolina try to explain why Notre Dame is not as popular as their school could fill up any stadium in the country.  While true that Notre Dame is likely not the most popular school in any State in the entire country, it’s probably the only one that could get itself ranked in the top 10 in popularity in any state (if restricted exclusively to college football fans).  One thing I remind folks in the southeast of all the time is that “USC” might mean the University of South Carolina to them, but west of Mississippi, USC means the University of Southern California.  The same holds true for “UT.”  Go west, and UT means the University of Texas-Austin.  Anywhere you go, ND means Notre Dame…except maybe in North Dakota where the recently dropped "Fighting Sioux" nickname and use of a strikingly familiar monogrammed ND was recently discontinued.  Whether on the west coast, east coast, locally in the Midwest, or  even abroad, Notre Dame’s fans will travel to see this team play.

            Many theories have been posited as to why this is the case.  There is one (though really linked to a second) reason that I find this to be true.  Ask a casual individual where Notre Dame is located, and I’d be willing to guess most couldn’t tell you it was in South Bend, Indiana.  Of those that know it’s in South Bend, even fewer would be able to tell you where South Bend is located within Indiana.  Notre Dame is, quite simply, not associated with regional ties.  Instead, its ties are with the Catholic population.  Notre Dame is hardly unique in this respect.  There are many Jesuit Catholic schools.  There are many protestant affiliated schools as well.  However, only BYU can boast the immediate recognition of school to religious affiliation that Notre Dame can.  For Catholic sports fans, many of whom happen to be of Irish-immigrant descent, the success and pride of watching the small catholic school beat the big boys in the 30’s, 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s is as much a tradition as going to church on Sundays.  The haters will claim this is unfair.  Well, it’s equally unfair that USC has a bunch of attractive co-eds, amazing weather, and a location in one of America’s largest cities.  Schools interested in generating money need to know their strengths and exploit them.  If Notre Dame’s is an unhealthy attachment that a significant portion of the population relates to, then kudos to Notre Dame to exploiting that position.  If you think that Al Golden at Miami or Lane Kiffin at USC doesn’t walk into a recruits home and tell them they don’t want to spend it in South Bend if they could spend it in their city, then there’s nothing I can do to change your mind.

            This brings me to the point about Notre Dame’s BCS and television tie-ins.  I hear it all the time: “How come ND gets every home game televised and my team, (fill in the blank), doesn’t even though we’ve been better than them over the past 5 years?”  The answer lies in that fan base.  For NBC, or any other major media power, risk-aversion is part of the game.  When these exclusive television contracts are made, a media power wants to know what they’ll get in return, and Notre Dame is the closest thing to a “sure thing” there is.  Television contracts are extremely expensive and done years in advance.  Until 2008 when Alabama returned to national prominence, their yearly records for the seasons leading up to that had been:  2003: 4-9; 2004: 6-6; 2005:  10-2; 2006:  6-6; 2007: 7-6.  A team even with the fan base and tradition as Alabama had been awful leading up their breakout.  NBC, in order to get the benefit of a 5 year contract to capture the good years would have been banking on a regional power returning to prominence with no indication of that to be forthcoming.  Argue as you may about Notre Dame’s track record during that time, it’s irrational, national fan base makes that nearly a moot point.  Regardless of how the Irish do, their games constantly get rated at or near the top of viewership figures on a weekly basis.  If this upsets you, you can try to explain it to an ND fan, but chances are the same irrationality that keeps them watching week in and week out will keep them from agreeing with your argument.

            It’s also important to remember that it’s not just NBC.  NBC only shows Notre Dame home games.  Yet, virtually all of Notre Dame’s away games also get picked up for regional, if not national coverage by either ESPN, ABC, or CBS.  Why?  Same reason.  These media powerhouses can review the numbers and know that from a viewership guarantee, there’s no safer play.  Sure, the hardcore college football fans might prefer to see an Oklahoma State/Arizona game, but that audience is likely to watch whatever you put on even if it’s not their preference.  The casual sports fan (a market ignored far too often by the diehards) is still more interested in the “irrelevant” Notre Dame squad than Mike Gundy’s uptempo offense.  Go where the money is will always be the mantra of television, news, and radio.  Independent analysis that rejects the anecdotal grumblings of Notre Dame haters will tend to have itineraries that look a lot like the student athletes of the Fighting Irish.

            That gets me back to the reason for this article:  Is Notre Dame relevant?  When everything stated above is taken into account, the answer is a clear:  Relatively?  They’re irrelevant.  Nationally, they’re still an important part of the college football landscape.   Notre Dame has set the bar so high in terms of success that from a national title stand point, they’re irrelevant until they prove otherwise.  As part of ND Nation,  I have to concede this.  At the end of the day, a team will always be judged by on the field impact, and Notre Dame’s has not lived up to the lofty expectations that legends like Rockne, Leahy, Parseghian, and Holtz engrained into the Notre Dame culture.  That being said, Notre Dame’s importance to college football cannot be understated.  One reason that our society on whole loves sports is that it ties the past to the present.  Major League Baseball is better when the Yankees are good.  The same holds true for the Lakers and Celtics in the NBA, the Packers, Steelers, and Cowboys in the NFL, the Red Wings in the NHL, and Michigan, Alabama, and Notre Dame in college football.  The enduring franchises that have excelled in numerous eras are always relevant.  They set the bar of excellence long ago, and they give sports its storied heroes and despised villains.  Fair or not, there is a first mover bias to sports.  The teams that achieved fame when a sport rose to prominence will always be relevant to the health of that sport.  Their ups will always receive more accolades, and their downs will be similarly scrutinized.  If Notre Dame ever becomes truly irrelevant we’ll know because we won’t be having this debate.  Until then, I plan to watch our nationally televised primetime game tomorrow night against Michigan State as the irrational, crazed fan that will keep Notre Dame in the public spotlight for the foreseeable future.

Eat "Mor" (?) Chick'n

Whoa!  Look who’s taking a stand!  That bigot!  You’re a piece of trash, and I’m gonna kick you out on the curb just like Chick-Fil-A!  Suck a fat one!  Okay…do we have that out of your system now?  Good (and if you continue reading, it’s at your own peril, and please bother to indulge me if you’ve read that far).

There’s no doubt.  Dan Cathy’s comments about gay marriage had a lot of attention in the past week.  Mainly bad, and with good reason.  However, for those willing to consider a different point of view, read on.  For those that don’t, can I just issue the apology now and not have to hear about it later?  In case you were wondering…..Yes, I do enjoy the taste of puppy blood.  Yes, I do hate freedom.  And yes, I do support the “Free Bin Laden” campaign.  And if you believe in any of those things, please leave my blog now.

So Dan Cathy personally came out and finally said what should have been apparent.  He doesn’t support gay marriage.  In fact, he believes in marriage in the “biblical sense,” for whatever that’s worth.  I’m confused.  This is a company that has voluntarily been closed on Sundays since its inception for religious reasons.  It’s a company that vets its franchise applicants and denies them all the time for numerous reasons.  MBA students/graduates…please refrain from your criticism.  Chick-Fil-A does not give a darn (damn for those of you in the non-Chick-Fil-A-o-sphere) what you think.  They’re not looking to maximize profits.  Were they looking to do so, they may have listened to you by now.  It’s that simple.  If your argument against the company is that they’re not maximizing profits, then please stop reading.  They don’t care, and neither do I.

For those that dislike Dan Cathy’s comments for other reasons…read on.  Let’s get a few things out of the way before we go too far:

            (1) Yes, I am a liberal.

            (2) No, I do not personally agree with Mr. Cathy’s stance.

            (3) Yes, I am from the South and have grown up with Chick-Fil-A.

            (4) No, I do not find that relevant.

            (5) Yes, I am an Aquarius…thanks for asking.

Look, if you have decided you’ll never go to a Chick-Fil-A again because of his comments, then I’m not going to change your opinion.  I assume you have reasons for doing so.  However, I do find it shocking that people have gone so overboard over Mr. Cathy’s personal opinions unless they legitimately vet every single CEO of every single company they’ve ever given money to.  I’m guessing you haven’t….

If you have….my bad, you’re right.  I AM a moron for assuming that because I don’t bother to consider the personal views of every company CEO that I provide money to, that I am, in fact, an idiot.

Truthfully, I don’t care what the personal opinions of a company CEO are.  At least so long as it doesn’t affect their business model.  Now, if Chick-Fil-A stopped serving people who were homosexual, or they stopped serving couples that were homosexual, or they stopped serving in states where gay marriage was recognized…I might have a problem as well.  However, just because Dan Cathy personally comes out against gay marriage, doesn’t mean I need to stop going to his restaurant…..for me……personally.

This is America.  Mr. Cathy is free to say what he wants to say.  You’re free to do with your money what you want to do.  If those things no longer intersect, then fine.  Don’t’ expect him to lose sleep over it though.  His long ago formed opinion is not likely to waiver.  Nor is mine. 

Oh, and for those that want to compare it to Nike, get lost.  Nike’s policy of letting 8 year olds in China make their shoes is completely different from an old Southern Baptist CEO taking a personal opinion on a social matter that does not otherwise influence his business practices.

Oh yeah, and, were I to really dissect my group of friends, I’m sure I’d differ with some of their opinions on social issues as well.  Thankfully, I’m grounded enough, as are they, where we can overlook those differences together and actually achieve a positive friendship.  If you’re not in that same boat, then I ask you, why have you read this far??? 

Ideals are great, and far be it from me to choose for those that decide they’ll no longer go to Chick-Fil-A.  At the same time, I am not the devil for going there.  I am not supporting the devil.  I’m enjoying the same product I always have, at the same price, and guess what……anyone in favor of gay marriage will be able to too.  Should that change, let me know.  Otherwise, until you’re able to tell me the personal stance on every socially polarizing topic of every CEO of every company you buy a product from, please let me go in peace.

Kindly,

Moons (This is NO way represents the opinions of BH).

Roger "God"dell: Liiving Up to His Name

NOTE: Since much of the debate is raging on Roger Goodell's "god-like" complex, he is intentionally referred to as "GODdell" throughout this piece.

Since the NFL, and more directly Roger Goddell, handed down punishment on the New Orleans Saints for “Bounty Gate,” much has been written and said about the magnitude of the penalties. (ASIDE: I believe it was Jonathan Coachman on ESPN Radio who said it, but why exactly is every public fiasco called “______________ gate?” I get that its origin is Watergate. That was the name of a hotel, it was not a “gate” that involved some deplorable water conspiracy.) Anyways, I digress. Many have claimed that Mr. Goddell was heavy handed in his punishments, particularly with respect to Sean Payton. I can neither confirm nor deny this as I was not present when Goddell and Payton met and do not otherwise have first hand knowledge of the sweet caress of the Commish. It’s an issue worth exploring: Why exactly do people believe the punishment was too harsh? First though, let’s quickly consider Goddell’s reasons before moving onto the debate.

Reason One: Player Safety

Since Goddell took over, there’s no question that player safety has been a priority of his. The NFL is far and away the most popular professional sport in the United States. I know, I know. Most thought it was the WNBA, but that’s just an ESPN led P.R. stunt. Goddell’s not an idiot (is there a Wonderlic test that NFL execs could take to hash this out though?), and he understands that big name players drive the league. He’s made it quite apparent to all involved: Hurt my players, and I’ll hurt you. Players have been fined, suspended, publically chastised, and had their family pet turned over to Michael Vick’s care for violating this rule. A program put specifically in place to harm others was clearly not going to sit well with this guy.

Reason Two: The Player’s are suing! The Players are suing!

Another proferred ($10 word there) reason for Goddell’s penalties is to help cut off pending lawsuits by former players who are now suffering memory loss and other long-term effects of their time in the NFL. I think this reason is highly overstated. Or, is it? I can’t really remember. Ever since LT clocked me while on a cocaine induced rage, my memory’s been a bit fuzzy. I think he may have solicited me for sex too, but again, I don’t really remember. Former players are claiming that the NFL was negligent about player safety, failed to fully inform them, and failed to do enough upon retirement to assist them. Really?

Do you know what football….or boxing……or MMA…….or hockey……or badminton are outside the realm of organized sports? Felonies. Well, maybe not the last one. That depends on how you interpret the word “shuttle cock.” What exactly did the players need to be told? Did they need to more directly be told that engaging in organized fisticuffs with 6’5” 300 lb. men might be hazardous to their health? In related news, smoking’s bad for you. Oh yeah, but isn’t that just it? The tobacco industry got crushed for harming the public, so will the NFL. False.

Big tobacco got killed for lying to the American public systematically for years to sell more of their product. I’m pretty sure the NFL’s done the exact opposite. Hell, they used to market videos of the NFL’s “Biggest Hits.” ESPN Sunday Night Countdown used to have a segment called “Jacked Up!” I’m pretty sure that the NFL has never ignored or hidden the violence of their sport. In fact, for years they pretty much used violence as their primary marketing tool. Oh yeah, and in the meantime, those guys they marketed got paid a whole heck of a lot of money for being the heroes and the villains of such videos. I mean, if we were talking about those little dudes that used to play for virtually nothing without pads and with a leather helmet on, I might get the point. However, the NFL each step of the way has taken steps to improve player safety. These guys chose to get into this sport. They got paid well to do so. I’m sure the NFL will eventually settle, but I’m not convinced it’ll be for as much as people think, and I certainly don’t think Goddell’s mind was just on the money when he made this decision.

Reason Three: You lied to me? You’re dead to me.

This is at the heart of the reasoning for Goddell’s actions. We might consider Reason One to be the stomach, and Reason Two to be the appendix. The Saints were told to stop. They didn’t. In fact, they took steps to cover it up, blatantly lied, and defied “God”dell. Others who have similarly defied people named God have suffered similar fates. I’m looking at you heathens of Babylon. It was the underhanded, ongoing practice that increased the risk to players on the field that led to Goddell’s actions. Wait, that sounds familiar. Oh yeah, didn’t I mention just a little while ago that what got Big Tobacco into trouble was the lying? Hmmm……..they didn’t fair so well. The Saints didn’t either. It might be appropriate to restate Goddell’s philosophy as this: “Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, I’m gonna mess you the f--- up.”

So why exactly are people up in arms (I’d prefer to be packing something a little more substantial than arms) about “God”dell’s decision?

People’s Response #1: Other teams were doing it too!

Well, to that I say, if everyone else was jumping off a bridge, would you? Actually, yes, I think I would. I mean, if everyone else was jumping off a bridge, I’ve got to assume that the bridge was on fire, or that at bare minimum Tim Tebow had promised salvation to the faithful. So forget I said that. Instead, I’ll quote from the beloved movie A Christmas Story: “Adults loved to say things like that but kids knew better. We knew darn well it was always better not to get caught.”

Who ‘Dat putting bounties on the field? Da Saints! We know ‘dat. Dat’s da difference. I don’t care if other teams were doing it. They were at least doing it more discreetly. I’ll try not to use “’dat” again during this post, but no promises.

People’s Response #2: This type of punishment is unprecedented! It shocks the conscience that the Saints are the first team to lose their coach for an entire season!

Isn’t that the point of things that are “unprecedented” and “shock” us? As a general matter, it’s because they’re the first to occur. Now sure, sometimes we’re shocked when say movies like Home Alone 4 come out because they’re not the first to occur, but instead we’re stunned that it just won’t end, but that’s the exception rather than the rule.

Also, that’s the definition of “unprecedented.” It implies there’s nothing to look back to. If Goddell had given them a slap on the wrist (Wouldn’t that also be heavy handed? How else are you going to generate any power?), then people would just clamor the next time this happened that the Commish escalated punishment too severely. It’s a circular argument, and I prefer my arguments square because right angles are much more enticing.

Goddell did what he thought he had to to make his point. He prefers his points to be sharper than yours, and given the money involved, he’s got every right to do so.

People’s Response #3: But that’s just it! This one man has too much power!

Is it bad to consolidate power? Look at Russia under Stalin, Cuba under Castro. Power leads to stability. And I just got this blog flagged by the FBI. Okay, I’ll admit, power consolidation is certainly not a concept endorsed by American ideals. We like our democracies open, representative, and with a side of freedom fries. Give me freedom or give me death! Is that enough to get me off the FBI watch list? The thing is, when have we ever thought businesses needed to act as democracies? Sink or swim. Survival of the fittest. Less government involvement.

The NFL is a business first and foremost. Goddell is, for lack of a better term, the CEO. His job is to protect the product and integrity of the game, and you’re not always going to be popular to make that occur. There are few, if any, businesses where the employees have an opportunity to overrule the CEO on decisions. Why should this be different in the NFL? The players, coaches, and staff are all employees of the NFL at the end of the day (albeit very strong, athletic, and well compensated employees). If the NFL falters, then the owners will replace Goddell. It’s that simple. They are businessmen after all. I somehow doubt though that many owners who also pay their employees dump trucks filled of unmarked, non-sequential bills are all that offended that the Saints are being docked for intentionally and covertly attempting to slash the tires on all those dump trucks.

The point of all of this is agree or disagree, Goddell did what he believes is in the best interest of the NFL on the whole. He’s going to put a stop to bounty programs or escalate. It’s an archetypal war game that he’s banking on not being a game of tick-tack-toe, and only time will tell if it’ll work. So, let’s stop the scrutinizing of this decision, and move on to an enthralling game of chutes and ladders!

- Moons