The BCS standings: I was very surprised by the Hokies' #14 rating in the BCS standings, especially when you consider that the two human elements, the USA Today and Harris Polls, have the Hokies way down at #19. The computers slotted Tech at #8, and that moved the Hokies up to #14 overall.
I can't really explain the computer ranking, except to say that maybe the computers put a high value on strength of schedule (which is no longer an explicit part of the BCS formula, but is buried in the algorithms of the computer rankings), and maybe those computers really like it if you play Alabama, as the Hokies did in week one.
Of more consequence, however, is that the computers don't factor margin of victory into their equations. There are no "style points" in the calculations. So barely beating ECU (15-10) and Marshall (29-21 in 3OT) matters to humans, but not the computers. All the computers see are wins over teams that are otherwise 9-2, and one of those wins (ECU) was on the road.
Just look at Jeff Sagarin's rankings (scroll down after clicking). The version of Sagarin's rankings used in the BCS (PURE_ELO in the link) don't factor in margin of victory, and the Hokies are #7 in those. But in his separate ratings for the USA Today (yes, it is horrible, this web site I'm linking to) he does factor in margin of victory, which he is on record as saying he prefers, and in that ranking, the Hokies are #26.
The humans have seen Virginia Tech struggle on offense (#110) and win close games over non-glamorous teams, and they have punished the Hokies for it. Humans don't care that Virginia Tech's defense is #2 in the country; they just like to use the phrase "winning ugly." The human polls also factor in that the Hokies weren't even receiving votes when the season started, thus the #19 ranking in both the USAT and Harris Polls.
How about Texas A&M, though? Like the Hokies, they played Alabama and lost. Unlike the Hokies, they lost another game, to Auburn, at home. The computers punished A&M for that, ranking TAMU #18 to the Hokies #8.
But in the human polls, because A&M has Johnny Manziel and a sexy offense (#3 in the nation), the fact that their defense is #118 in the country goes unnoticed, and the Aggies are #13 and #15 in the Harris and USAT, respectively.
The joy of being ranked: However it comes about, there are positives to being ranked #14 in the BCS. Just take a look at today's announcement about the Tech-Boston College start time. Ignore the fact that it's a nooner, and focus on the fact that it's going to be on ABC, ESPN, or ESPN2.
Since the start of the 2012 season (20 games), the Hokies have appeared on those three networks seven times. Do you know how many of them weren't special broadcast slots (like the Labor Day game vs. GT last year), special matchups (like the CFA Kickoff Classic this year), a bowl game, or a Thursday night game?
One. Last season, ABC and ESPN2 showed the game between #14 Clemson and unranked Virginia Tech. Other than that, it's been a steady diet of ESPNU (7 times in the last two seasons), the ACC Network (4 times), ESPN3.com (2 times) and FSN (once).
So this is a big deal that ESPN has chosen to show the Hokies on one of their three major outlets.
Is that going to do the Hokies a favor? Haha, that remains to be seen, my friend. The Alumni Stadium crowd is going to be late arriving, if it indeed "arrives" at all. Boston College is going to be tough and physical, and they're going to hit Virginia Tech in the mouth. The Hokies are going to have to get up, get out of bed, and get ready on November 2nd.
Regardless of the outcome, Tech isn't likely to score many style points to change those Harris and USAT poll numbers, because this game is going to look more like trench warfare than a high-flying offensive display by either team.
But that's looking down the road. So, let's, well ... look down the road.
Looking down the road: Here's the rest of VT's schedule:
- Oct. 26: Duke
- Nov. 2: @BC
- Nov. 9: @Miami
- Nov. 16: Maryland
- Nov. 30: @Virginia
Putting aside that no game is a gimme for these Hokies, let's assume a win over Duke. And let's assume a win over Virginia, whose bus has launched itself off the cliff, after surrendering 35 straight points to lose to Duke ... again. And let's assume a win over Maryland, who started out 4-0 but has since been outscored 97-10 by FSU and Wake, and squeaked out a one-point win over Virginia, arguably the worst team in the ACC. (UNC and NC State might have a say in that debate.)
If you assume all that, it's pretty clear that the game at Miami is for the Coastal Division title ... unless the Canes, in addition to a near-sure loss to FSU, also manage to drop one somewhere else against a schedule that includes Wake Forest, @Duke, Virginia, and @Pittsburgh.
In that second case, the Hokies will have two chances to win the Coastal: at BC on Nov. 2nd and at Miami on Nov. 9th.
Bud's D now #2: Some of the other top defenses in the country struggled Saturday, and that launched Virginia Tech to #2 in the nation in total defense. The Hokies give up 256 yards per game, second only to the 228 ypg given up by Michigan State.
Wondering how good a chance the Hokies have of catching Sparty? Let's take a look. Each team has five games remaining, and here are the offensive rankings of their remaining opponents:
Offensive rankings of remaining opponents:
- Virginia Tech: Duke (#40), BC (#99), Miami (#16), Maryland (#52), Virginia (#86)
- Michigan State: Illinois (#48), Michigan (#47), Nebraska (#21), Northwestern (#61), Minnesota (#111)
That's bizarrely even on a game-by-game basis, except for when VT plays #99 BC and MSU plays #47 Michigan.
If this continues to be a two-horse race, it might come down to what happens in conference championship games and bowl games. If the Hokies make the ACC Championship Game, they'll face Florida State, the #5 offense in the country led by this year's awesome freshman, Jameis Winston. (Remember when Michael Vick was the only freshman QB to tear it up? Manziel and Winston have made that ancient history.)
MSU will probably run up against Ohio State (#20 offense), but only if they make it past Nebraska and Michigan first. Then the bowl games will be a crap shoot.
Virginia's conundrum: Virginia's flameout against Duke was pretty spectacular. The Cavs came out and slapped the Devils silly for 24 minutes and 11 seconds, taking a 22-0 lead in Charlottesville. Then the Hoos laid down and got outscored 35-0 the rest of the way.
That puts Virginia at 2-5 overall, 0-3 in the ACC, with games remaining against Georgia Tech, Clemson, @UNC, @Miami, and VT.
Wow. The Cavaliers play the always-tough Jackets, then three of the top four teams in the ACC in the last month of the season. Kiss bowl eligibility goodbye.
(Before we continue in that vein, Duke is 5-2 and has a great shot at being bowl eligible for the second straight year. They close with @VT, NC State, Miami, @Wake, and @UNC. Lots of good chances to win #6 there.)
Against Ball State, the Cavaliers had announced attendance of 38,228, which may have been ... optimistic. Against Duke, it was 39,071, and those watching on TV were treated to the site of an end zone that was nearly empty, especially the upper deck.
UVa has three remaining home games: GT, Clemson, and VT. Clemson and VT will help with attendance, but you have to wonder if fans will show up for the GT game, and you have to wonder where the bottom is. Was it the 38,000 for Ball State, or can it get worse?
When fans quit, it's time for the coach to go, because otherwise, the damage to the financial bottom line and to fan morale can take a long time to recover from. UVa athletic director Craig Littlepage said Friday that head coach Mike London will be back next year, but his words don't mean anything. Tech athletic director Jim Weaver once said in October 2002 that Ricky Stokes was "safe" through his fifth year, then fired him after his fourth season, in March 2003. He said Seth Greenberg wasn't in danger of losing his job in February 2012, then fired him two months later. It's what ADs say.
So what's Virginia's conundrum? At a time when support for Mike London is cratering, it would cost a ton of money for Virginia to fire him. A ton.
Virginia's got deep pockets. When they fired Al Groh, they paid him a $4.33 million buyout over two years. Ouch.
But that's nothing compared to what it would cost to buy out Mike London and his staff. Per this Washington Post article:
It would cost approximately $8.06 million to buy out the remaining three years of London’s contract this offseason. He signed a two-year extension and got a raise after the Cavaliers finished with an 8-5 record and earned a spot in the Chick-fil-A Bowl in 2011.
The university would also need an additional $3.12 million to pay for the contracts of associate head coach Tom O’Brien, offensive coordinator Steve Fairchild, defensive coordinator Jon Tenuta and special teams coordinator Larry Lewis, all of whom were hired last winter when London overhauled his coaching staff.