Sunday Morning Quarterback: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: The Record of Wrongs: Vanderbilt Commodores

The Moral Universe's Theoretically Just Construction of the Kansas Jayhawks

Or, where KU fits into this mess, and where it doesn’t.

Once the calendar turns to November, the ‘undefeated’ label is like a VIP tag, and the Jayhawks are enjoying flashing their credentials at incredulous bouncers at the door to the top of the polls, guys used to waving the likes of Ohio State on past under the same circumstances. But Kansas? Kansas doesn’t belong here. It’s just hanging around, hanging around, being a pest, pushing for that triumphant moment it can be resisted no longer.


Listen to ‘em...you’re a star, kid! What’s the name again?
- - -
If the pollsters at large haven’t yet reached that point, leaving KU fourth across the board, at least a few of their individual members have fully succumbed to the flop sweats of Mangino Fever. Native Kansan Dennis Dodd, for one, instructs readers everywhere to stop resisting the inevitable. Just stop it – it’s so...so...clear!:
Before the moment passes, let's get one thing straight. Kansas is No. 1.

Sure, the BCS and polls say something different, but take it from someone who has seen all the contenders. Oregon might be playing the best. LSU probably has the best athletes. Kansas deserves to be at the top.

n the craziest fall since the 2000 election season, being undefeated should speak loudest. Ask W. All these wacky upsets and KU -- that's what we call it here in Kansas -- is the only BCS conference team sporting a bagel, a doughnut.

Zero, as in number of losses.

That counts most in this season when top five mob hits have abounded. As someone who has lived 30 miles from the campus for the past 26 years, I can't believe I'm writing this, but it's true:

The stadium that once was the venue for a Huey Lewis and the News concert (what, you missed Hawkstock '83?) is the home of the No. 1 team in the country....
- - -

Dodd’s article is actually titled "Doubting it is dumb: Kansas is clear No. 1," confidence so bold and staggeringly unironic it oozes, single-sentence paragraphs intact, into the next cubicle, taking over the keyboard of Sportsline basketball columnist Gary Parrish, who is so stoked by the Jayhawks’ improbable run he leaves his own area of expertise, bites on "Mangino for President" and lays down the challenge – who dares arouse the wrath of the great and powerful Jayhawks with their philistinism?:
There are only two undefeated teams left in Division I-A. That's not surprising, really.

But the fact that one of them is Kansas is downright shocking, and it has developed into one of college football's major storylines. Sure, the Jayhawks haven't beaten a lot of great opponents, or even one great opponent, to tell the truth. But they haven't lost to anybody either, and that's something worth celebrating, particularly in this wacky season full of upsets.

See, you can question KU's wins.

But you can't highlight any losses.
- - -

Parrish is right on: you certainly can question Kansas’ wins. Put them next to the BCS frontrunners LSU and Oregon, for example, using Jeff Sagarin’s top 30 and strength of schedule ratings as a shorthand. See:
LSU Oregon Kansas
Oppt. Win % (SOS Rank) .588 (19) .638 (12) .449 (97)
Avg. Margin of Victory 22.6 20.8 31
vs. BCS Opponents 6-1 6-1 6-0
Avg. MOV vs. BCS 15.6 19.3 19.8
vs. Top 30 4-1 3-1 -
Avg. MOV vs. Top 25 10.4 11 -
vs. Top 10 - 1-0 -
Avg. MOV vs. Top 10 - 7 -
Loss -6 vs. JS#17 -7 vs. JS#25 -

The dilligent voter is forced to seriously challenge his assumptions here. How many quality wins does it take to offset a close loss to a decent team? How many wins over mediocrities and empty-calorie cupcakes does it take to overcome the lack of a single opponent of consequence? How much does the simple fact of being undefeated really matter in and of itself? Ask the same question with the Jayhawks’ resumé next to their nearest competiton for number three behind the Tigers and Ducks:

Kansas Oklahoma Missouri
Oppt. Win % (SOS Rank) .449 (97) .489 (82) .531 (52)
Avg. Margin of Victory 31.0 28.2 19.7
vs. BCS Opponents 6-0 6-1 7-1
Avg. MOV vs. BCS 19.8 17.3 21.1
vs. Top 30 - 2-0 1-1
Avg. MOV vs. Top 25 - 8.5 -2
vs. Top 10 - 1-0 0-1
Avg. MOV vs. Top 10 - 10 -4
Loss - -3 vs. JS#56 -10 vs. JS#4
West Virginia Ohio State Arizona State
Oppt. Win % (SOS Rank) .467 (50) .524 (55) .512 (27)
Avg. Margin of Victory 23.7 22.3 16.2
vs. BCS Opponents 5-1 7-1 7-1
Avg. MOV vs. BCS 18.3 21.4 14.1
vs. Top 30 0-1 2-1 1-1
Avg. MOV vs. Top 25 -8 11.3 -0.5
vs. Top 10 - - 0-1
Avg. MOV vs. Top 10 - - -12
Loss -8 vs. JS#15 -7 vs. JS#20 -12 vs. JS#3

How far can a team’s claim as "the best" go when said team hasn’t played anything approximating the best opponents? It should be pointed out that Kansas’ schedule is not Hawaii’s, which is unambiguously the weakest in Division I-A – unlike the Warriors, Kansas has won its way into the discussion with respectable wins over Big 12 middle-dwellers Colorado, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma State and Texas A&M, all of them (with the exception of A&M) winners of at least one game of consequence their own selves. And the Jayhawks will have their day, against Missouri in two weeks, and if they pass that test, the Big 12 Championship the week after that. Once it gets that kind of value on its wall, KU has itself an argument.

But, certainty of a few proud neighbors notwithstanding, not yet. I don’t know where Kansas will fall on my BlogPoll ballot Wednesday – part of this exercise is to parse the merits of all of these teams – but it will not be one or two.

0 recs  |  Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Losses
The Ohio State and LSU losses are both listed as against "JS#20" - is that a typo or an "at the time" kind of thing?  I ask because I'd have guessed UK to be higher than that when they beat LSU.

by osuvandy on Nov 13, 2007 9:31 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Ranks
I'm guessing that's where UK is ranked now. Where teams are ranked at the time they play is pretty irrelevant; where they're ranked now is more accurate.

As a side note, ol' Dennis doesn't tell you why the University of Kansas is known as "KU" - it's because Kentucky already took UK, and Kansas wanted to be different. The More You Know...

by Year2 on Nov 13, 2007 11:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm an idiot...
I'm sure it's possible for teams to be tied.  Somehow that escaped me earlier.  Please disregard.

by osuvandy on Nov 13, 2007 11:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No, Vandy, you'r right
Kentucky is 17th. Fixed.

by SMQ on Nov 13, 2007 11:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Let me ask you this...
Is Kansas going to lose this year? (At least prior to the bowls)

If you say "yes", you are perfectly justified in ranking them other than 1 or 2. If you say "no", then the eventual Big 12 Champ (who will have beaten Missouri and presumably Oklahoma) must be number 1, or 2 at the very least.

My answer to the question is "I don't know". However, as the only undefeated BCS team, they must be considered the only team capable of controlling their own destiny. If winning every game in a BCS conference and a conference championship game (when there are no other undefeated teams) doesn't get you a BCS Title shot, then this whole system is worthy only of immediate destruction.

So I rank them number 1. If they lose, that will be adjusted. But they deserve it as the only team who controls their destiny.

by Mergz on Nov 14, 2007 8:49 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

No
Kansas doesn't deserve it until it beats decent teams. Every team controls its destiny.

by SMQ on Nov 14, 2007 10:00 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Err, no-no
Every team controls its destiny at the season's eginning, except those in the "other" conferences (Boise State, for instance, or Hawaii).

I meant the only team that currently controls its destiny is Kansas, or at least the only team that should seeing as they are an undefeated BCS team.(Admittedly LSU might be another). Oregon certainly does not - if KU wins out they will not play in the BCS title game. So not "every" team currently does.

Of course, what they are ranked now is irrelevant. In three weeks, it is everything.

by Mergz on Nov 14, 2007 10:08 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I agree the ranking now is irrelevant
But Kansas being undefeated at the end of the year is not an automatic bid to number one. No way am I making that leap until it happens, then we can evaluate against Oregon and LSU and see where they stack up. But I don't concede that Kansas will be number one then (they might be), and I will not give it credit for the potential of beating Missouri and Oklahoma. They have to beat them. Then we'll talk about number one.

by SMQ on Nov 14, 2007 10:15 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

As a Jayhawks fan...
I have no problem with them being 5 behind LSU, Oregon, OU, MU at this point.  The only argument I can make is that, hey, the Jayhawks don't get here very often, let them have their one shining moment and put them #1, but I understand why people don't want to do that.  

Ultimately, though, this will play out over the next 3 weeks, and Jayhawk fans are cool with that.  If we win, we deserve it, if not, we don't.

Also, to Year 2, KU is KU because the school used to be called Kansas University.  All the Big 8 schools follow the same pattern, OU, MU, NU, CU.

by backinbudblack on Nov 14, 2007 1:54 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

different philosophies
Most of the debate here seems to stem from differing philosophies about rating systems.  I agree with SMQ that a team should be rated based on what it has accomplished thus far.  I don't think a rating system should be based on what you think a team might do, especially this late in the season.  Coming from that angle you could argue that Kansas is currently overrated.  If they go undefeated and beat Oklahoma in the Big 12 title game, I don't think many people would hesitate jumping the Jayhawks over some or all of the teams that are currently ranked higher.

by crepuscular on Nov 14, 2007 2:32 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Question about polls
This actually brings up a question that I'm curious about.  Does anyone know if the different human polling outfits lay out any guidelines to the people that fill out ballots?  Like the debate here: should people vote based on resumes or based on how they think teams match up head to head?  Obviously the resume approach doesn't work well at the beginning of the season.  And isn't the head to head approach pretty much what people use when they fill out "power rankings?"

by crepuscular on Nov 14, 2007 2:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

KU
I have to agree with SMQ on all things Kansas at this point.

KU's schedule was built for one purpose...to become bowl eligible. There is no other way around it. Never in their wildest dreams did the administration think they would be in this position.

KU has yet to reall prove anything to me.

Win out and I can see them in the BCS title game, although, I'm still not crazy about their four non-conference games.

by Bry422 on Nov 14, 2007 4:24 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

College Football Coverage
Start posting on Sunday Morning Quarterback »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Official Partner of CBS Sports