UPDATE on the Collegiate Rugby Championships

True to predictions, Cal-Berkeley won its third straight title at the Penn Mutual Collegiate Rugby Championships, completed today in Philadelphia. Cal defeated last year's runners-up, Kutztown State, in another thrilling finals match - this one going to overtime before getting the winning try a minute into sudden death.

Meanwhile, the Penn State women also won their third straight title with a dominant 24-7 victory in the finals (after a 31-0 rout in the semis).

Here are the final results from Sunday's play:

Men's Collegiate:
CUP FINALS - QF) Life def. Navy 15-5...Kutztown St def. Indiana 31-12...Arizona def. Arkansas St 7-5...California def. Michigan 31-0. SF) California def. Life 33-5...Kutztown St def. Life 19-14. FINAL) California def. Kutztown St 17-12 (OT).

PLATE FINALS - SF) Dartmouth def. Air Force 20-5...UCLA def. Virginia Tech 27-10. FINAL) UCLA def. Dartmouth 33-5.

BOWL FINALS - SF) St. Joe's def. Alabama 21-14...Notre Dame def. Penn St 22-0. FINALS) Notre Dame def. St. Joe's 22-17.

SHIELD FINALS - SF) Boston College def. Texas 38-5...Temple def. Clemson 21-17. FINALS)  Temple def. Boston College 19-12.

Women's Collegiate:
CUP FINALS - SF) Penn State def. American International 31-0...Lindenwood def. Notre Dame College 24-17. THIRD PLACE) AIC def. Notre Dame 10-5. CHAMPIONSHIP) Penn State def. Lindenwood 24-7.

5th/6th place) Life def. Michigan 37-0.
7th/8th place)  Kutztown St def. James Madison 17-12.
9th/10th place) Arizona def. Delaware 20-0.
11th/12th place)  Notre Dame University def. Boston College 19-5.

Speaking of rugby...the Penn Mutual Collegiate Sevens Championships are on!

With the pool play completed today for the men, the twenty college teams are being divided into the four cutlery divisions (shield, bowl, plate, and cup...and who decided which of those was the most presitigious? It almost seems exactly backwards to me!). Here are the results from the men's pool play:

Pool A: Cal-Berkeley (3-0), Virginia Tech (1-1-1), Notre Dame (1-2), Boston College (0-2-1).

Pool B: Navy (3-0), Kutztown State (2-1), Air Force (1-2), Temple (0-3).
Pool C: Indiana (3-0), Life University (2-1), Alabama (1-2), Clemson (0-3).

Pool D: Arkansas St (3-0), Michigan (2-1), UCLA (1-2), Texas (0-3).
Pool E:  Arizona (2-1), Dartmouth (2-1), St. Joe's (1-2), Penn State (1-2).

So, the groupings for the single-elimination finals tomorrow: 
CUP Quarterfinals - Navy v Life University; Indiana v Kutztown State; Arkansas St v Arizona; Cal-Berkeley v Michigan.

PLATE - Dartmouth v Air Force; Virginia Tech v UCLA.

BOWL - St. Joe's v Alabama; Penn St v Notre Dame.

SHIELD  - Boston College. v Texas; Clemson v Temple.

In the women's field, three teams went 3-0 in their pool play, setting up the finals tonight: Penn State (two-time defending champs), Notre Dame College (from Ohio), and Lindenwood College (from Belleville, IL). They'll be joined by wild card second place finisher American International College in the semi-finals (AIC plays Penn St).

Meanwhile, the other eight schools play a three-game bracket tournament for places five through twelve, and Life University, Michigan, James Madison, and Kutztown State won the first round to set up two games tomorrow for places 5-8, while Delaware, Arizona, Boston College, and Notre Dame University will compete for places 9-12.

Here's a possible solution for the NFL's extra point dilemma!

While watching the Penn Mutual Rugby championships on NBC (the finals are tomorrow afternoon, btw), and explaining to my children how the try and conversion (extra point equivalent) work, and it dawned on my seventeen year old and I that it might be the solution the NFL is looking for...

Wherever the touchdown is scored in the end zone, the extra point must be attempted from a place perpendicular from the physical point where the touchdown is scored. 

I think you'll need to restrict it to between the numbers, because kicking from the physical sideline has inherent issues. Also, you can debate about the concept of how far back from the 2 you can go (I think not at all, but I'm open to that conversation), and to what constitutes the "point where the touchdown is scored" - certainly where a runner crosses the goal line, but when a receiver catches the ball on the back or side line, are we counting the spot where his feet first touched down? But the NFL Rules folks are good at those sorts of details; that shouldn't be a deterrent. 

But that would not only make the extra point interesting again, it would make the preceding touchdown more intriguing! Do you stick with the fade route to your 6'6" wide out, knowing where you're going to have to kick the point from? Does it increase the importance of the running game - especially the goal-line fullback? It leaves open the possibility of the faked two-point conversion, or simply the choice to go for two when you're on the numbers. It goes against the NFL's moving everything inwards, shrinking the hashmarks to the point where they're probably going to replace the two current hashes with one right down the middle of the field! But the more I think about this, the more reasonable it seems to me! It increases the reliance on good kickers, unlike most of the trendy thoughts on simply eliminating the kick altogether. And it's just as do-able at the college or high school level - What's not to like?

Is it too early to talk Top 30 in college football?

Yes. Yes it is.

However, Sports Illustrated doesn't think so, and they've put out their "post-spring camp Top 25" plus five more, and it's an interesting list to peruse...

1. Ohio State                                       11. Stanford                                           21. Georgia Tech
2. Baylor                                              12. Ole Miss                                          22. Oklahoma
3. Auburn                                            13. Arizona                                            23. BYU
4. Alabama                                          14. USC                                                  24. LSU
5. Michigan St                                    15. Boise State                                      25. Oklahoma St
6. TCU                                                  16. Clemson                                          26. Arkansas
7. Notre Dame                                    17. Missouri                                          27. Utah
8. UCLA                                               18. Georgia                                           28. Mississippi St
9. Florida St                                        19. Arizona St                                       29. Texas
10. Oregon                                           20. Wisconsin                                      30. Michigan

 I find this list absolutely fascinating to contemplate, which is why I post it. At Following Football, we do NOT rank football teams until somewhen in mid-October at the earliest. What we do do is group teams into what we call "tiers"; eventually there'll be about twenty tiers, A through T or so, even when they're ranked (that's also how we project game outcomes) but at the very beginning of the season? We'll divide them up into two, three, four tiers...then six or seven...then maybe eight or ten..until we have enough information to rank them all, #1-127. (UAB football, rest in peace.)

But about THIS list? Look at these crunchy tidbits!
> Auburn 3 and Alabama 4? Delicious!
> OSU deserves #1, but MSU isn't very far behind at #5...
> Baylor at 2 and TCU way back at 6? But TCU's the one bringing their QB back!
> How about this one? Everett Golson goes to perennial playoff contender Florida St, #9... but the team he left is #7!
> Look at the Pac-12! UCLA #8, Oregon #10, Stanford #11, Arizona #13, USC #14, and Arizona State at #19! (Even Utah sneaking in at 27!) THAT will be a packed conference!
> The "Group of Five" better figure out a way to defeat Boise State! They start the season ranked this year...even a loss or two may not knock them out of the top non-Power spot! (Only BYU sits on the list, at #23, to challenge.)
> Oklahoma 22 and Okee State 25? Fun!
> Arkansas 26 and Texas 29? (Or OU/UT? Or...)
> And look who they've got sneaking in at #30! High hopes, indeed, Mr. Harbaugh!

One hundred things to love about College Football in 2015!

Sports Illustrated has whetted our appetite for the fall college football season by sharing with us their top one hundred reasons to look forward to what the NCAA boys in pads have to offer in 2015!

Segment one (#100-76) is here...
Segment two (#75-51) is here...
Segment three (#50-26) is here...
And segment four (#25-1) is here...I'll give you a hint: year two of the College Football Playoff is at #1!

Hello, point-shaving possibilities!

The Big 12 now has a tiebreaking formula in case Baylor and TCU tie again at 8-1...unfortunately, it has a hint of disaster lurking underneath it in the case of a three way tie... check out this link.

A sample rugby tournament bracket...

So, we wanted to show you what this format of tournament looks like in practice: Here is a sample bracket for a twenty-team round-robin tournament, followed by the major knockout phase and a sample "consolation" bracket as well...

	OPENING ROUND ROBINS - DIVIDE YOUR TEAMS INTO GROUPS OF 4
	Each team plays all three of the other teams in the group for a record.
	A		↔		C
		↕	↖↘↗↙	↕
	B		↔		D
	E		↔		G
		↕	↖↘↗↙	↕
	F		↔		H
	I		↔		K
		↕	↖↘↗↙	↕
	J		↔		L
	M		↔		O
		↕	↖↘↗↙	↕
	N		↔		P
	Q		↔		S
		↕	↖↘↗↙	↕
	R		↔		T
	THEN, take the group WINNERS and however many more
	you need to get a power of two, and put them in your
	"CHAMPIONSHIP BRACKET":
			#1 (best record)
		Loser		Winner
	Winner		#8 record			Winner
	Loser		#4 record		Loser
		Loser		Winner
			#5 record
Winner					Winner			Winner
	Winner		#2 record
		Loser		Winner
	Loser		#7 record		Loser
	Winner		#3 record			Winner
		Loser		Winner
			#6 record
	And you rank everyone, and then put each group of four remaining
	teams into a smaller bracket as shown, so they can compete for a
	smaller prize, and against teams closer to their own skill levels!
			#45th
		Loser		Winner
			#48th
Winner (of the Tea Bag)					Winner (of the Tea Cup)
			#46th
		Loser		Winner
			#47th
	Everyone competes for something, against someone who should be
	close to their own level of accomplishment, so they can grow!

 

A little bit o' American Rugby for you this weekend!

Here's the link to the collegiate Rugby Sevens tournament this weekend being held in Philadelphia, and broadcast on NBC (and NBCSN, if anyone actually has that cable station).

It includes a nice "rugby sevens for dummies" section that I'll reproduce here for you:

Rugby sevens for dummies    
- Where usual rugby matches are made up of 15 players a side and 80 minutes of total playing time, sevens is a much different variation of the sport. 
- While sevens matches are played on a field that is the same size as a normal rugby pitch, teams send only seven players onto the field at a time. The matches are considerably shorter than their conventional counterpart as well, with only two seven-minute halves and a two-minute break for halftime, instead of the usual 10.
- Because of more space and a wide-open pitch, rugby sevens are usually considered to be more exciting, fast-paced and high-scoring than the usual 15 vs. 15 matches. Starting in 2016, the sport will be a part of the Olympics.

The Penn State women and (of course) the Cal-Berkeley men are each two time defending champs and are looking to "three-peat" this weekend.

I'm always fascinated by the format of rugby tournaments - there's a round-robin, four teams in a group preliminary round, just like soccer and most sports of a similar structure, with the first place teams and some wild cards moving on to the championship "knockout" phase (for the men, twenty teams in five groups produce five firsts and three wild cards for the finals; the women have twelve teams and similarly put four in the finals).  

But the key difference in the rugby culture (and a cool difference, I think!) is that everyone moves on to a "knockout" round - while the top eight men's teams play for the cup, the next four compete for the "plate", the next four for the "bowl", and the bottom four for the "shield". Every team that comes is guaranteed a couple more games, so they'll play five or six games in all for their trouble of coming - and that's the joy of the trip, isn't it? To get to play the sport you love? As a bonus, those last couple of games are the most likely to be against teams of your approximate talent and accomplishment level! So if you're only the 18th best team, and Cal wipes you out in the round-robin, don't worry! You'll get a couple of games against the 19th and 17th best teams, teams that are also struggling as you are! For any tournament, this is good, but for a school tournament? This is ideal learning for everyone!

What's a 49er? What about a Brown?

Thought you might like this one...from one of my favorite mags, Mental Floss, comes an article that examines where the nicknames of each of the 32 NFL teams comes from!

This week in the AFL - Round 9!

So, here we go with Friday night footy coming up at 4 am our time this coming morning...the home team, Grand Finalists last year, versus the bottom-of-the-ladder team that just fired its coach two days ago. Hard to see this being close, isn't it? And yet, Sydney/Carlton (at 60.5 points) is NOT the widest spread of the weekend! That would be Hawthorn over by the decimated Gold Coast by 62.5 Saturday afternoon, because the Hawks' pattern this year after a loss is to come back the next week and take it out on their opponent big time...and they're playing in Tasmania, where they've never lost...AND they're simply that much better than Gold Coast anyway. Pick Sydney and Hawthorn..and as ridiculous as it sounds, take the points. Hawthorn wins by MORE than 62.5 (we say 100). (Our ratings say it'll be 68 for both games, by the way.)

The rest of the weekend, though, looks much better:

Port Adelaide @ Melbourne - the Power are a much better team, favored by about 20, but they're not playing well, and Melbourne's trying to play well. We're taking Melbourne with the points to keep it close.

GWS @ Western - the two most "fun" teams of the season so far! Three weeks ago, this would have been a coin flip, best of three...of seven....of fifteen... Now, however, the Bulldogs are showing some flaws again, and the Giants have their first three-game winning streak going in their history; they're playing really well, and they've shown that going on the road to Melbourne is not a problem. Taking GWS to cover.

Essendon @ Richmond - "Dreamtime at the 'G", as they call it for some weird reason. This game is always supposed to be the highlight of the "Indigenous Round", where the AFL honors its native Australians (the "Indigenous"), of which many of the leagues stars are (Lance Franklin, Eddie Betts, Cyril Rioli, and so forth. It's a great testimony to the efforts Australia goes to in order to integrate a subjugated people, as we've essentially failed to with the Native Americans ("Indians") in this country. (Oh, and we're punting Richmond to win - bettors have it as a tossup.)

Fremantle @ Adelaide - You could have left off the opponent and made the prediction: It's almost impossible to defeat the Dockers right now. The oddsmakers have them as 20 point faves, and our ratings suggest it'll be higher than that. Freo all the way.

St. Kilda @ Brisbane - 22 of 24 writers at Real Footy - The Age (one of the major coverage sources I use - in fact, some of the player of the year tallies come from them) have this going to the home team. I disagree. The Saints are playing strong footy with a lineup that can't handle the big boys. But Brisbane is hardly a big boy any more. Saints in an upset.\

North Melbourne @ Collingwood - Here's my other upset: I'm taking the Magpies over the Kangaroos, two of the weirdest mascots (and very Australian, I must add!). Fremantle absolutely destroyed North last week, exposing a ton of problems that Collingwood will be eager to exploit. North hasn't been good against good teams this year, and despite my pre-season predictions, Collingwood's been a good team! Collingwood by a goal.

Geelong @ West Coast - This is a tough journey for any club, and so much of Geelong's roster is young now, unused to this tough place to play. Geelong will give them a good fight (and I'm taking the Cats with the points) but West Coast Eagles win the game narrowly.

(By the way, my record this season is pretty good: I've won 49 of 72 this season, ahead of 23 of the experts on The Age, ahead of 95% of the AFL Tipsters as well! My "betting record", although I refuse to actually bet on sports, is well about 50% too, sitting at 42-30.)

Get rid of the extra point?

Andy Benoit of the SI.com product Monday Morning Quarterback has a great argument regarding the currently-bubbling extra point debate - get rid of it altogether. Make the touchdown worth seven points, with the option of running a play that essentially "gambles" one point either way: fail, go back to six; succeed, move up to eight. (It would be the same as it is now, in that sense - a six point TD, with an option to go for two, or take the "free" single point to make it seven.)

What do you think?

Along the lines of the FF rating system for the AFL...

...comes the Following Football CFL rating system! (Yeah...we're bored. What's your point?)

This was formulated using the numbers from the last three CFL seasons (except for Ottawa, who was an expansion franchise in 2014), with each season being worth half of the one that followed it. The ratings have been normalized with 30 as a median, so that the sum of all the ratings should always equal 30*9 teams=270:

Calgary Stampeders           48.5
Edmonton Eskimos            37.7
British Columbia Lions     32.5
Saskatchewan R.Riders    29.6
Hamilton Tiger-Cats          29.5
Toronto Argonauts             29.5
Montreal Alouettes             29.2
Winnipeg Blue Bombers   20.2
Ottawa REDBLACKS           13.3

A few interesting notes about this rating system as it's played out...
--- Calgary seems really high, but that's what you get when you're as dominant as they were last year, plus very solid seasons the two previous years. It remains to be seen if that rating accurately predicts scores, however - my guess is that it's too high for that purpose.
---Given an average score of 30, it's funny to see only three of nine teams above thirty. Of course, having four teams in the 29s makes up for it! That's about how close those teams have been the last couple of years!
---What will home field advantage be worth? Traditionally, three points, but whether that works with this rating system is still anyone's guess. 
---Like Calgary, Ottawa is so far off the norm that it's anyone's guess whether that number will be accurate or useful in predicting outcomes and scores for the REDBLACKS, the only fully-capitalized team in professional sports! The great thing about these rating systems, though, is that they self-normalize over time - if they're not accurate yet, they will be soon!

So, we'll have to wait and see how this plays out over the course of the 22-game CFL season. We'll track the games here, right alongside the AFL in the early season and the NFL in the fall and winter. As need be, we may adjust the numbers slightly in the pre-season as we "tweak" the set-up for its initial use.

Play ball!

Less than two weeks to go north of the border!

Thirteen days and counting until the pre-season starts for the nine Canadian Football League teams! Ottawa will travel to Hamilton on Monday, June 8th for the first practice tilt, with the actual season opener three weeks beyond that: Thursday, June 25th, when Ottawa plays at Montreal!

Here's the entire schedule - with an odd number of teams at this juncture in their varied existence, the CFL has a bye every week, so three of the other teams will actually have two games under their belts before the BC Lions take the field on the Fourth of July.

Can anyone beat the Calgary Stampeders this year? Will the Eastern division produce a winning team this season? Will Ottawa be able to win a few games? Stay tuned!

The longest career in coaching is over!

Mick Malthouse, three time premiership coach at West Coast (1992, 1994) and Collingwood (2010), has finally had his time at Carlton come to an unceremonious ending, fired today after bringing the issue to a head himself the previous morning.

Malthouse coached 718 games in the AFL, passing "Jock" McHale earlier this season. But with Carlton mired at the bottom of the ladder with minimal talent, and the hopelessness and in-fighting between coach and board and media reducing the players to a shell of their former selves (effort was marginal the last few weeks, with tackle counts unbelievably in the 30s the last two games), a change had to be made. Originally, it was "we'll evaluate at the end of the season", but as things got worse it became, "well, we'll look at it during the bye week in Round 11", to which Malthouse angrily asked, "What are you going to learn about me in the next two weeks you don't already know?" Essentially, once Malthouse understood the writing was on the wall, he engineered his own early firing so as to let everyone "get on with it" (in my opinion). 

Now, the situation is more clear cut, if still dire for the Carlton Blues...
- The press conference and firing by the Carlton board.
- Mick Malthouse's statement - my coaching career is over.
- Where do they go from here? Who do they get to coach? (The back-line coach takes over interim duties immediately, btw.)
- How did it get THIS bad in the first place?

Good on you, Cameron Guthrie!

Thought this was super cool at the time it happened - Cam Guthrie, himself a budding star for the Geelong Cats, stopped former Brownlow medalist Chris Judd of the Carlton Blues after the Cats had wiped them out and did something that happens on occasion on the soccer pitch but almost never in footy. He asked for Judd's jersey.

It was a sign of ultimate respect for the role model Guthrie had as a footy player, and probably the first and last time he'd play Judd in an AFL game. In fact, he probably outplayed his idol that night, but that didn't erase years of admiration. 

Judd's reaction was..."I'm sorry, what?"

As I said, it's not something that footy players do. But Judd couldn't help but be grateful, and he willingly traded jerseys with this young player he may not even really have known.

 
Cameron Guthrie ‏@CamGu3

Privileged to compete against a player I have always had great respect for. Thanks for the jumper @cjayfive

Week 8 down under...

Results of Round 8...
Geelong def. Carlton 140-63
West Coast def. St. Kilda 131-78
GWS def. Adelaide 108-84
Collingwood def. Gold Coast 132-63
Sydney def. Hawthorn 73-69
Fremantle def. No. Melbourne 115-42
Essendon def. Brisbane 136-78
Melbourne def. Western 103-64
Richmond def. Port Adelaide 76-43 

The AFL ladder right now...
Fremantle is still two games clear, and with Sydney's revenge win over the Hawks (possibly the game of the year so far!), Freo has four games clear of Hawthorn with 14 to go! 

Two games back at 6-2 are Sydney and two surprises: West Coast (who will find out in the next four weeks if they're real or not, playing three finalists) and Greater Western, who won three in a row for the first time ever. To put the Giants' success in perspective: the best season in GWS' history, 2014, was 6-16. They're already 6-2 this season.

At 5-3 comes two teams who (while firmly in the top 8 right now) have questionable credentials given the quality of teams they've beaten: Collingwood and Adelaide. Right behind them are six teams fighting for the last finals spots - Hawthorn (very likely), Richmond (see Collingwood), Essendon (who knows?), Geelong (looking more and more probable), Western (depends which game you watch!), and North Melbourne (who may be as talented as anybody, but...). If you give the top four credit for likely making the playoffs, the next four most likely to last the season might be Adelaide, Hawthorn, Geelong, and maybe Western. But it's a long season...

...and Port Adelaide is still lurking there at 3-5, if they can return to earlier form. Their partner at 3-5 is Melbourne, but those were three upsets. Below them are St. Kilda and Brisbane, with two upsets in eight attempts, and 1-7 disasters Gold Coast and Carlton.

In the FF Rating system,
Hawthorn still leads with an 85.3 rating (it doesn't hurt that they lose by four and win by a hundred), but Fremantle has crept within a few points to 81.8 (a jump of thirteen points since round 1). Right behind them are Sydney (no surprise, 76.5) and West Coast (yes surprise, 74.1).

Then there's a huge clump sitting in spots #5-13, all close to the average score of 50: Geelong (58.3), Adelaide (56.5), Port Adelaide (55.0, despite recent losses), North Melbourne (54.3), Collingwood (53.6), Richmond (53.1), Essendon and GWS (51.7), and if we stretch the definition, Western (40.6, but until their last two big losses they were also around 50). You see why it should be hard to predict these games!

Below that, you have Melbourne (29.8), Gold Coast (who's dropped all the way to 23.3), Brisbane (21.6), St. Kilda (actually increased to 16.0) and lowly Carlton, who's lost 23 points this year and sits at a 14.3 rating. (Gold Coast has also dropped 23 points, and Port has lost 17. On the other side, GWS is up 20, Collingwood up 17, West Coast 15 and Fremantle 13 since March!)

Here's the latest on the NFL's "Race To LA" - I think I'll make that a tag! - from MMQB. Apparently, San Diego and Oakland together have purchased the land needed in Carson (part of LA, just south of downtown) to build a joint stadium, all while saying it's their "back-up plan". Protestors in Oakland are wondering why the owner (Al Davis' son Mark) would hire Carmen Policy to spearhead the Carson project if it wasn't his first priority.

So, who's going to end up in LA? As with virtually every comments section on the 'Net, the rational commentary devolves into a dick-showing contest, but many of the commenters think like I do - why are we compelled to bring ANY team to LA? Los Angeles just isn't a pro football city! If one team needs a new home, and all three of those (including the St. Louis Rams) have a legit history in LA, that's fine. But it seems to me as if there are loyal enough fan bases of a good enough size in St. Louis and San Diego to make those locales work, and to make new stadium deals work if need be. Oakland, however, was left behind thirty-five years ago for LA for a reason. The Oakland Coliseum is a POS. That city doesn't have the finances to do what Davis wants, or for that matter what the NFL wants.

Move the Raiders - and just the Raiders - to Los Angeles, or more accurately Carson, CA. (And in twenty years or so, they can move back...)

Some CFL news as the season there approaches - and it's Michael Sam!

Michael Sam, the defensive end from Missouri cut from the Rams before the season last summer, and famous for being the first openly-gay American football player drafted by the NFL, has signed a two-year contract with his Canadian Football League rights-holders, the Montreal Alouettes, for the 2015 season.

(Which begins in just five weeks, by the way, with Montreal playing Ottawa!)

The most interesting comment, I thought, was in the press release from the general manager, Jim Popp:

"With the signing of Michael Sam, we have become a better organization today," Alouettes general manager Jim Popp said in a release. "Not only have we added an outstanding football player, we have added even a better person that brings dignity, character, and heart to our team."

I find that interesting because there are two ways to take that: One, it's just PR to say how "hip" you are with gay people and he's really a great guy because he's gay...or Two (and having watched this saga the last 15 months or so, this is my feeling), he realizes that it's most likely the absolute truth. Sam has played every media opportunity correctly: not a self-promoter, not playing up or down his homosexuality, but simply being Christianly appreciative of the opportunities he's being given, as any non-star player should be. 

I may not be a fan of his "lifestyle", as we euphemistically call homosexuality, but I'm a fan of his. Good luck, Mr. Sam!  

PS - here's my fave tweet on the subject so far...

Siobhan Morris ✔ @siomo

Michael Sam has to be the first CFLer ever.....to compete on Dancing with the Stars. (right?)

9:56 AM - 22 May 2015

 

Footy news - 5/22/2015

Geelong whomped Carlton from the opening bounce Friday night (again, that's already happened in Australia) 140-63, increasing the pressure on the Blues to do something dramatic when, truthfully, no quick fix is going to change the fact that they simply don't have enough AFL talent on their roster. Firing legendary coach Mick Malthouse, now the winningest coach in history, in mid-season is cruel and would do no good; the calls from the sensible folks to announce that Malthouse will coach out the season and a new coach (and lots of new players!) would join the Blues for 2016 makes more sense at this point. (A story on afl.com.au's "Pick A Winner" show listed only SEVEN players who should by consensus in the Carlton ranks, and another half-dozen who might; the others aren't really qualified to play at the highest level yet. Legendary player Garry Lyon said Monday that only THREE players "deserved to wear their jumpers" (which are uniform jerseys, statesiders). THAT makes it tough to win when you have a 22-man roster of grown men AFL players on the other side of the pitch!)

Meanwhile, the AFL has revised the system for two draft day peculiarities that Americans aren't familiar with: the father-son connection and the academy priority pick. This year, for example, Isaac Heeney, easily one of the two or three best players in the draft, went to Sydney at choice number 18 because he had been "raised" and trained in the Sydney Swan Training Academy. There should certainly be some credit given to a club for doing the work which made the player great, but Melbourne was willing to draft him at 2 and never had the chance. Similarly, Joe Daniher went to Essendon a few years ago at pick 10, even though he was arguably the best player in the draft and would have gone #1 in the open market - however, since his dad played for Essendon, he had the right to declare himself a Bomber, and being highly rated that required the Dons to spend whatever their highest draft choice was on him. The new system is extremely complicated, but computer apps can handle those details and level out the playing field without depriving clubs of those advantages. (Wonder how long it'll be for a Giant or Sun to be drafted as a father-son!)

One of the funny occurrences in the Geelong game, especially for an AFL regular season game, was the request on the field after the game from winning team member Cam Guthrie, 23 years of age, to veteran two-time Brownlow Medal winner Chris Judd of Carlton for his jumper, ideally signed! The speculation, well-founded, is that Guthrie had grown up as a footy player idolizing Judd (a good choice, as footy role models go), and although Guthrie frankly had a better performance than Judd Friday night, he's simply "that kind of dude", as they called him in the radio booth! Judd obliged, but hesitated about taking Guthrie's Geelong jersey in return...

Comparing expectations to reality in the AFL...

It's always interesting to compare what a team "should" be doing (which only means what we on the "outside" thought we knew!) with how they're actually doing, and with a third of the footy season behind us, here's a peek at the AFL ladder...

TEAM  (Current record, betting odds record, FF rating predictions, original FF and Sports Fan predictions)
Fremantle           7-0     7-1      8-0     15-7      14-8
West Coast         5-2     6-2      6-2     8-14      8-14
Sydney                 5-2     5-3      5-3     18-4      16-6
Adelaide              5-2     6-2      7-1      14-7-1   13-9
GWS                      5-2     5-3      5-3     10-11-1  7-15
Hawthorn           4-3    8-0      8-0     19-3      19-3
Collingwood      4-3     5-3      5-3      7-15      10-12
Western               4-3     2-6      2-6     9-12-1    5-17
N. Melbourne    4-3     4-4      4-4     18-4       15-7
Richmond           3-4     5-3      6-2     12-10     11-11
Essendon            3-4      4-4     4-4      11-11      11-11
Port Adelaide    3-4      6-2     6-2     15-7       17-5
Geelong               3-4      3-5      2-6      13-9      13-9
St. Kilda              2-5      0-8      0-8      2-20     3-19
Melbourne         2-5      0-8      0-8      5-17       5-17
Brisbane             2-5     1-6-1     1-7      6-15-1    10-12
Gold Coast          1-6     2-5-1    3-5       12-10     13-9
Carlton                1-6      2-6      2-6        3-19     8-14

    Evaluating "how your team is doing" isn't always as simple as looking at their record. For example, the difference between Hawthorn and Western is marked, even though both are 4-3 right now. The Hawks, according to "punters", should have won all their games so far, but only have four wins to show for their efforts so far. Meanwhile, the Bulldogs (favored this week for only the second time) "should" have only won one game so far this year, but have managed to go 4-3 (and lost to Fremantle only at the moment of climax). By that, we understand why Doggie fans are happier than boosters of the reigning champs.

   But more subtle than that, look at Geelong. Given the tough games they've had so far, they're faring as well as can be expected - so 13-9 doesn't look like it's out of range yet at all. For that matter, Melbourne fans look at their record, include the fact that they're winning games they weren't expected to win, and dream of maybe sneaking up the ladder farther than their 5-17 expectation.

   There is some deception here, though. Gold Coast, for example, very quickly and obviously was NOT the team we thought they'd be when they came into the season, so their game-by-game predictions are not significantly better than their record. In reverse, West Coast has the same situation: very quickly it became clear that their injuries weren't going to be the problem we'd thought going into the season.

   What do we expect going forward from here? I'd be surprised if Fremantle didn't keep up in the top two or so, barring major injuries or other issues unforeseen. West Coast still has some proving to do, since their record so far reflects the weaker teams they've beaten, but their play has been impressive. The vulnerable team at 5-2 besides them is the loser of the GWS-Adelaide game Saturday, whom Hawthorn would pass with a victory at the MCG against Sydney (not a foregone conclusion at all). The vulnerable team at 4-3 is still Collingwood, whose early fixture has had its share of lumps. It's hard not to see Port Adelaide finding some better form and moving up. Richmond has already seen its easy part of the schedule, and Essendon's dealing with outside issues again, and Geelong has a puncher's chance if they've really found a way to win without speed - but I'm skeptical.

What about this weekend? The betting public and Following Football each have Geelong over Carlton Friday night (meaning 4 am here in Idaho), West Coast over St. Kilda (big), Collingwood over Gold Coast, and Fremantle at home over North Melbourne on Saturday. We agree on Hawthorn beating Sydney again in the grand final rematch, but only because it IS in the MCG, where Hawthorn calls home. The rating system disagrees with punters in the GWS/Adelaide game: it lists the Crows as 4 point favorites, but the humans are putting money on GWS and the line's getting higher and higher in their favor (11.5 points GWS's favor this morning). On Sunday, we all have Essendon over Brisbane, Western over Melbourne, and Port Adelaide having enough to make it past Richmond at home, although I'm taking the Tigers and the 20 points myself.

Good article about the collapse of the Gold Coast Suns

Rarely does a team go from Finals favorite to last place - the NFL's Houston Texans of 2013 come to mind, after five straight games of pick-sixes doomed Matt Schaub's career as QB there - but the AFL's Gold Coast Suns have shown how to do it in style, going from fancied darkhorse premiership favorites to a 1-6 start that still looks better than they do.

Michael Whiting has written a great article about the Suns for afl.com.au - incisive, insightful, and cuts to the bone about the major issues without beating around the bush. Definitely worth the read!

So Everett Golson's going to be a Seminole, eh?

The well-traveled Everett Golson is changing schools again (this is transfer number 3, for those keeping score), moving from Notre Dame, where he was a Heisman candidate until he learned giving the ball to the other team was easier than he'd thought, to Florida State, who apparently needs a quarterback after number 1 draft pick Jamies Winston left for Tampa Bay last month. (Seems to me the back-up did a pretty good job against Clemson last year, but hey, what do I know?)

ESPN's Mark Schlabach has done his usual thorough job looking at how transfers have managed over the last ten years or so - some good, some not so much. My personal opinion is that three transfers are a three-sided red flag against Golson, a sign that he can't handle adversity. I know FSU put up with a ton of crap from Winston, and think they got what they wanted out of him - a national title, another undefeated season - but the stain never goes away. 

As for Golson, I'd recommend the advice of the 65-year-married couple, who when asked about the secret of how they'd stayed together so long, answered, "We stayed because we didn't consider leaving an option. If it's broken, we fixed it. We didn't just abandon the marriage at the first sign of trouble!"

Well, they've done it. Now, we'll see...

The NFL has decided to change the extra point rule in order to add some excitement to the play following a touchdown.

In the last five years, the success rate for an XP kicked from the 2 (essentially a 19-yard FG) has been literally 99% - one out of one hundred missed or blocked. It's hard to argue for the two point conversion when you're risking a sure point - and the success rate last season on the few attempts (it was tried on less than once every twenty opportunities) was just 47.5% last season. Unless you needed two to tie at the end, why bother?

So the thinking is three-fold: 
1) Make the one-point harder, thereby more interesting to watch.
2) Increase the interest in the two-pointer without skewing the balance too much the other way.
3) Give the defense a reason to give a bleep about defending it.

Here's how they did that - 
1) The line of scrimmage for a kick for one point will be moved back to the 15. This makes it a 32-33 yard kick, which last year kickers in the NFL converted 92.5% of the time. Still relatively straightforward, but not a given any more.
2) The two-pointer is still going to be from the 2 yard line. (So the Eagles will have to decide ahead of time if they want to go for two! No more of Chip Kelly's bizarre line formations!) Do the math: if you have a 92% chance of one point, or a 47% chance of two, the multiplication slightly favors going for two now. Slightly. Don't go nuts; this isn't the XFL!
3) Extra points are now "live", which I don't believe means that the clock moves, but it definitely means that the defense can return a blocked kick or a fumble or interception for a two-point score!

For me, it looks like a win-win situation. Add interest, keep the kickers involved (and in fact feature them more), make it a more important strategical part of the game, yet don't change the fundamental nature of the game (for example, changing the goal-post width)...and just in case they've missed something terrible, the rule will be reviewed next off-season for reform or removal if it doesn't work.

I'm all for it!

As the Player of the Year standings look, seven rounds in...

This is an interesting way to look at how a team is accomplishing what it's accomplishing this year... team by team, top of the ladder to the bottom, here's a quick spot check of what the Following Football AFL Player of the Year standings look like:

Fremantle (7-0)
Nat Fyfe leads all players by a wide margin, with 87 points (no one else is over 55), but look at the help he's getting: David Mundy (36 points), Lachie Neale (31), Matthew Pavlich and Stephen Hill (both 30), and Luke McPharlin (25), all in the top forty or so. In fact, the Dockers have a total of 14 players with votes this season so far, a nice "in-between" number that seems to indicate that a good set of starters are getting the job done for Fremantle.

West Coast (5-2)
While the Eagles have 17 players with accumulated votes so far, their leading vote-getter is reigning Brownlow medalist Matt Priddis with just 32 votes. Eliot Yeo and Josh Kennedy sit right behind the midfielder with 28 votes each, and Jeremy McGovern has 24.

Sydney (5-2)
The "other" Josh Kennedy has 39 votes for the Sydney Swans, but it's the great midfielder Dan Hannebury leading the team with 51 votes, good for third so far in the competition. Superstar Lance Franklin (32) is the other Swan in the top twenty, with 15 players totaling votes so far after seven weeks for Sydney.

Adelaide (5-2)
Moving up fast on everybody's radar is the phenomenal little forward Eddie Betts, the leader in the goal-scoring race for the Coleman Medal, who leads the Crows with 49 votes. Remind me again why Carlton didn't want him? On his heels are Rory Sloane (34 votes) and Patrick Dangerfield (32).

Greater Western Sydney (5-2)
I find it interesting that the top five teams are all from outside of the state of Victoria...GWS has just 11 players with votes, but those eleven include Dylan Shiels, who's been top five all season and sits at 48 votes right now; and perhaps the best full forward in the league right now, Jeremy Cameron, at 35 votes. Stephen Coniglio, Shane Mumford, and Adam Treloar are all in the twenties as well.

Hawthorn (4-3)
Raise your hand if you thought the defenders would be sixth right now. 
Liars.
Their percentage is still second overall, just behind the Eagles, because they lose by eight and win by eighty, but they'll have to win the big games from here on out, or the "Hawthorn mystique" will vanish completely.
In classic Hawthorn fashion, a league-leading 19 players have tallied votes this year, yet none more than relative unknown Jordan Lewis with just 26 votes. That's correct: no Hawk in the top twenty. But Grant Birchall (22), Shaun Burgoyne (20), Luke Hodge (20), Jarryd Roughhead (22), and the youngster Isaac Smith (21) all lurk just behind, ready to make Alistair Clarkston's "next man up" philosophy work!

Collingwood (4-3)
Even with this week's loss, the Magpies are still sitting higher than expected at this stage. They've gotten vote-worthy contributions from 16 players already this season, led by Scott Pendelbury (36 votes). Only Dane Swan (25) adds to the above 20 count, but individual great games from Paul Seedsman and Taylor "Tex" Walker add to the total scores.

Western Bulldogs (4-3)
13 players have led the way for the up and coming Doggies, led by veteran captain Robert Murphy (30 votes), and including twenty-something votegetters Liam Picking (26), Jake Stringer (22), Matt Boyd (22), and Marcus Bontempelli (20).

North Melbourne (4-3)
Out of the top eight by literally the slimmest possible margin (irrelevant at the one-third mark of the season!), the Kangaroos also have 13 players who have earned votes so far, led by Todd Goldstein at 32 votes. Only Jack Ziebell (21) has more than twenty votes. 

Richmond (3-4)
The highest scoring differential of the sub-.500 crowd belongs to perpetually-underachieving Richmond, with 14 players tallying votes so far, led by stud defender Bachar Houli (30 votes). Trent Cotchin (27) is the second man on the list for the Tigers, with Shane Edwards and Alex Rance (17 each) tied for third.

Essendon (3-4)
Just 10 players populate the Dons' list, but they're led by two men in the top twenty: Cale Hooker at 37 votes, and Michael Hurley at 35.

Port Adelaide (3-4)
At the top of the "disappointment" part of the bracket are the Power, who expected to be sitting Top Four this season (and still might - there's a long way to go). Robbie Gray has been consistently scoring votes this season, with 37 votes so far, and goal-scorer Jay Schulz sits at 30. 12 players have votes to their names for Port so far this year.

Geelong (3-4)
Starting the season 0-3 makes 3-4 look pretty good, but as the Cats transition from one generation to another, it wins when the youngsters do their job. Yet the top votegetters for Geelong have been Mitch Duncan (36 votes), Joel Selwood (22), and fourth is vet backliner Harry Taylor (16), with only youngster Mark Blicavs (17) to break it up. 11 players have tallied votes so far.

St. Kilda (2-5)
The Saints depend on just a few players to do the bulk of the big work, it seems: 10 players have votes, and only five have double-digits, led by David Armitage with a remarkable 53 votes. Josh Bruce (30), Sam Fisher (23), and Jack Stevens (22) top the list for the black, red, and white.

Melbourne (2-5)
While the Demons have 11 players earning votes, after Tom McDonald's 43 votes, it's pretty slim pickings. Only Jack Watts (14) and Nathan Jones (12) have double digits to join Tom.

Brisbane (2-5)
The last two weeks have been kind to the former three-peat champion (2001-3), moving up from an 0-5 start to beat Carlton and then Port Adelaide. Before that, there were just four votegetters, the highest being Daniel Rich with 4 votes. Now, Rich is up to 10, and has been passed by Stefan Martin (20) and new body Dane Beams (18); vote getters total 8 players now.

Gold Coast (1-6)
When you lose almost every game, you don't get many votes for top players. 10 players have earned votes so far, with Charlie Dixon leading the club with just 18 votes, and Harley Bennell second with 16.

Carlton (1-6)
Just 8 players have votes this year for the Blues, who have the Blues this year, as does legendary coach Mick Malthouse. Three are in double-digits, starting with Tom Bell at 20; the other two are Mark Murphy (16) and Patrick Cripps (13).