If I may, I’d like to clarify a few points…
The claim that we “deserve” a better matchup springs from the fact that, on paper, the game should be a mismatch.
We are #53 in Sagarin and you are #99. Neither of us has many impressive wins but our losses have been “impressive” – as a measure of the strength of the team, that is, and not as an excuse to justify an 8-4 record – while several of yours have been blowouts. Two of our losses came against BCS bowl teams and a third (in double overtime) against Wisconsin (ranked in the BCS top 25). We were competitive in all three games and should have won at least two of them, in my opinion.
Further, I am still bitter about the split. As I said to our commissioner, “Besides you know how much I hate the idea of playing down against the MWC. A bowl game featuring MWC #5 and WAC #3 endorses the notion that those are comparable positions. If we are going to play against the MWC, then it should be #1 vs. #1, #2 vs. #2, #3 vs. #3, etc. When we agree to games where we equate our #3 to their #5, we assist the MWC in publicly defining the relative position of both conferences -- with the Mountain West as superior and the WAC as inferior. I'm outraged that we would ever even consider providing such assistance -- much less actually do it.”
While it is not always clear on the MWC board, the complaints about the game have nothing to do with Wyoming, per se. It is really about the perceived disparity between any #53 and any #99. I think that our commissioner didn’t do a very good job of finding us a comparably rated opponent. I think he was so worried about getting Boise State into the BCS that he didn’t fight for us when he should have – or he didn’t fight hard enough. Somewhere around the country, there is another (on paper) mismatch and both games could have been improved if he had been able to negotiate a switch.
The deal was done on this bowl two weeks ago – and it didn’t need to be. My suggestion that we should have refused the invitation had more to do with putting the Commissioner’s feet to the fire on finding a game with a higher rated opponent than with any actual lack of respect for Wyoming.
As respects our team…
We started the year with a first year starter at quarterback and he committed a lot of unforced turnovers early – costing us games at Wisconsin and Cincinnati. I think special teams cost us the game against Boise more than the quarterback did. And the route at Nevada was a total team “effort”.
Your SOS is a little stronger than ours – but not as much as you would think as we have both played several highly rated schools.
Even with Mathews injury, we are the #7 rushing team in the nation. Despite his early turnovers, our QB is now the #25 rated quarterback in the country (QB ratings). So, unlike Air Force, we are not one dimensional and you can’t play us as though we were. Typically, Mathews starts slowly as the opponent sells out against the run. We then hurt them with the pass – forcing them to play us honestly – and then Mathews runs more-or-less wild.
Several of you keep stating that you are strong against the run but your NCAA rankings dispute that. You have the 91st rated rushing defense and the 73rd rated pass defense. Further, you have played only two teams with top 40 rushing offenses – Air Force, who had 30 yards more than their average against you, and TCU – who had 100+ yards more than their season average against you. I don’t think that rushing defense is your strength.
I predicted a 20-30 point Bulldog victory with Fresno getting 350 yards on the ground and 175 through the air. The yardages are more-or-less in line with our usual production adjusted upward to reflect your defensive stats. The margin of victory, and victory itself of course, depend upon a lot of factors.
But my call is based in large measure upon our relative stats.
Total Offense
Fresno State: 435.92 yards per game
Wyoming: 298.67 yards per game
Total Defense
Fresno State: 411.67 yards per game
Wyoming: 395.58 yards per game
Scoring Offense
Fresno State: 34.33 points per game
Wyoming: 16.92 points per game
Scoring Defense
Fresno State: 27.83 points per game
Wyoming: 27.25 points per game
In short, our offensive production is much greater than yours and your defensive production, while nominally better than ours, isn’t materially so. We’ve scored twice the points that you have and we’ve given up almost exactly the same number. Even a marginally tougher SOS doesn’t begin to offset the statistical differences that existed in the regular season.
Our punter and place kicker are among the best in the nation – both are first team all WAC. (The punter would be #1 in the nation but he isn’t nationally ranked as our offense has been so productive that he doesn’t meet the minimum number of punts to be included.)
That said, as pointed out upthread, we have done a poor job of forcing turnovers and have been generous ourselves in handing them out. Additionally, Hill’s teams are famous for disappearing when they don’t feel “motivated” by an opponent.
The game is not played on paper, however. Statistics measuring past performance have little to do with the outcome of this or any other game. I think we are the more talented team but if Wyoming is fired up and forces turnovers while Fresno does not, we could just as easily lose by 20 to 30 points as win by that margin.
Yoda out…
