Blog Article

Cal Football 2025: A Program at the Crossroads

Mark Haines on February 21, 2025

Every college football program has a breaking point.

That point for the California Golden Bears, aka Cal Football, is a .490 winning percentage—what industry insiders call the “Minimum Acceptable” (MA) winning percentage. This proprietary metric, developed by Coaches Hot Seat (the authority on coaching job security), is a data-driven warning system. The countdown typically begins when a coach’s record falls below this threshold.

Justin Wilcox’s winning percentage currently sits at .457.

The Numbers Tell A Story (And It’s Not A Happy One)

Let’s look at Cal’s progression over the past three seasons:

Cal Football’s future depends on addressing these challenges and improving their overall performance.

2022: 4-8 overall (2-7 in conference)
2023: 6-7 overall (4-5 in conference)
2024: 6-7 overall (2-6 in conference)

This isn’t just a pattern—it’s a problem. Wilcox’s tenure has been defined by incremental improvements followed by stagnation. The trajectory suggests a program stuck in neutral rather than building towards sustained success.

The $15 Million Question

Here’s what makes Cal’s situation particularly fascinating:

Wilcox is under contract through 2027
His 2025 compensation package totals $4.8 million
His buyout sits at approximately $15 million
His winning percentage remains below the critical .490 threshold

The Bears find themselves caught between the cost of change and the price of staying the same. Administrators loathe paying hefty buyouts, but they also know stagnation can cost even more—lost ticket sales, declining donations, and recruiting struggles. It’s a classic case of fiscal conservatism vs. competitive ambition.

But Here’s Where It Gets Interesting

Sensing the pressure, Wilcox has made his boldest move yet: a complete offensive overhaul.

The headline-grabber? Bryan Harsin as offensive coordinator. The subplot? Nick Rolovich as a senior offensive assistant.

Harsin, the former Auburn and Boise State head coach, brings a proven offensive system but arrives with baggage after a tumultuous SEC tenure. Rolovich getting a shot at a new coaching gig is fascinating—not just because of his high-risk, high-reward offensive mind but also because his tenure at Washington State ended over his refusal to comply with state vaccine mandates, not because of poor coaching.

Here’s what these moves tell us:

Wilcox finally acknowledges the need for wholesale offensive change.
The program is willing to take calculated risks on controversial but talented coaches.
The “defensive-minded” head coach is ceding offensive control.

The Numbers That Matter

Take a look at this offensive progression (or regression):

The decline in rushing yards from 2023 to 2024 is alarming. The offense isn’t just struggling—it’s losing its identity. For a team that relies on ball control and keeping its defense fresh, that’s a major red flag.

But here’s the silver lining—defensive improvement:

Wilcox’s defenses remain his calling card, and the strides made in 2024 suggest a unit capable of keeping Cal competitive. But in today’s college football landscape, defense alone doesn’t win championships—or job security.

The X-Factor Nobody’s Talking About

Rich Lyons.

Cal’s new chancellor isn’t just any administrator—he’s the first Cal undergraduate to hold the position in nearly a century. And he’s already talking about making football “self-supporting.”

This matters for three reasons:

It signals potential changes in program evaluation. Wilcox isn’t just competing against expectations; he’s competing against financial sustainability models.
It suggests new approaches to resource allocation. Don’t expect deep-pocketed institutional support if the football program can’t prove its worth.
It adds another layer of pressure to perform. Wilcox now has a boss who understands the program’s impact on the university and might not be as patient as previous chancellors.

Here’s What Nobody Wants To Say Out Loud

The 2025 season isn’t just another year for Cal football.

It’s a referendum.

On Wilcox.
On the program’s direction.
On whether Cal can compete in the modern college football landscape.

With realignment reshaping conferences, NIL deals changing recruiting, and fan engagement at a premium, the Golden Bears can’t afford to drift any further into mediocrity. A failure to break through in 2025 could push the program toward drastic change.

The Bottom Line

The tools for success are there:

New offensive philosophy
Improved defensive metrics
Fresh administrative perspective
Second year in the ACC (without having to face Miami, Clemson, or Florida State)

But here’s the truth nobody wants to acknowledge:

None of it matters if Cal can’t finally break through that .490 threshold.

Because in college football, you either evolve or dissolve.

And 2025 will tell us which path Cal has chosen.

Finally…

Don’t miss another deep dive into college football’s most crucial storylines and program developments. Our team-by-team analysis gives you the insider perspective to understand where each program is headed in 2025 and beyond. Subscribe for free now to access our comprehensive breakdowns, exclusive hot seat rankings, and in-depth conference analysis delivered straight to your inbox. Join thousands of college football insiders who trust Coaches Hot Seat to keep them ahead of the game. Hit the link below to unlock all our premium content and never miss another update.

Get the Coaches Hot Seat Insider Newsletter Here

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

No related posts found.

VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

Want to know what 2025 means for Boston College football?

Mark Haines on February 21, 2025

The numbers tell a story that changes everything about Boston College’s 2025 football outlook—and it’s not the story most people are telling.

The Hidden Truth Behind BC’s 2024 Success

When people talk about Boston College’s 2024 season, they focus on the flashy headlines:

The stunning upset over #10 Florida State (28-13)
Making it to the Pinstripe Bowl
A winning conference record that shocked the ACC
Four explosive offensive performances to close the season (37, 28, 41, and 34 points)

But here’s what they’re missing: BC built their success on a foundation deeper than big moments.

The Real Numbers That Matter

The Eagles didn’t just run the ball well—they dominated on the ground:

Averaged 166.1 rushing yards per game across 13 games
Exploded for 263 yards against Florida State’s elite defense
Crushed Syracuse with 313 yards on the ground
Dominated Duquesne with 302 rushing yards
Accumulated 2,159 total rushing yards for the season

But here’s what makes this even more interesting: BC’s defense showed they could be absolute game-wreckers:

Snatched 17 interceptions (ranked among ACC leaders)
Generated 31 sacks (including 16.5 from Donovan Ezeiruaku alone)
Created chaos with 72 tackles for loss
Held opponents to just 114.9 rushing yards per game

Why 2025 Is More Complicated Than Anyone Realizes

Yes, the transfer portal has thrown BC into chaos. The losses are significant:

Thomas Castellanos (1,366 yards, 18 TDs, 61.5% completion rate) to Florida State
Kye Robichaux (744 yards, 10 TDs, 4.3 yards per carry) to graduation
Donovan Ezeiruaku (16.5 sacks, 21 TFL) to the NFL
Four key defensive backs who combined for 7 interceptions

But here’s what the doom-and-gloom predictions are missing:

The Eagles have proven strengths they can build on:

A dominant rushing attack that returns key pieces like Treshaun Ward (406 yards, 5.3 YPC)
A defense that creates turnovers at an elite level
Special teams that consistently win the field position battle (16.4 yards per kick return)
An almost unbeatable home-field advantage (5-2 at Alumni Stadium)
A receiving corps that showed flashes (Lewis Bond: 67 catches, 689 yards)

The Real Challenges That Will Define 2025

Three specific weaknesses need fixing:

A Pass Defense in Transition:

Gave up 245.8 yards per game through the air
Allowed 17 passing touchdowns
Lost four key defensive backs to the transfer portal
Must rebuild while facing elite ACC quarterbacks

Quarterback Consistency Issues:

Completion percentages ranged from 84.6% to 46.4%
The two-QB system never found the perfect rhythm
Castellanos and James combined for 2,591 yards but struggled in key moments
Need Dylan Lonergan to master O’Brien’s system quickly

Road Game Struggles:

1-4 record away from Alumni Stadium
Averaged just 21 points per game on the road
Defense allowed 32.8 points per game in road losses
Must solve this to compete in expanded ACC

Why Brad Crawford’s 24/7 3-9 Prediction Misses the Mark

The numbers tell a different story about BC’s foundation:

O’Brien’s Transfer Portal Victories:

Dylan Lonergan: Former 4-star QB with elite arm talent
Ty Lockwood: SEC-tested tight end who knows Lonergan
VJ Wilkins: FCS All-American (90 catches, 1,055 yards)
Chuck Nnaeto: Immediate impact edge rusher
Tommy Matheson: Ivy League-trained offensive line depth

Returning Defensive Talent:

Amari Jackson leads experienced secondary
Khari Johnson brings veteran leadership
Jordan Thomas brings NFL coaching experience to D-line

Special Teams Excellence:

16.4 yards per kick return
5.9 yards per punt return
Field position advantage in 9 of 13 games

The Bottom Line: What Vegas Isn’t Seeing

Teams that can run the ball (166.1 YPG), create turnovers (17 INTs), and dominate at home (5-2) don’t collapse to 3-9.

The real question isn’t whether BC will fall apart—it’s how high they can climb if they:

Develop quarterback consistency under O’Brien’s tutelage
Transform their road performance (1-4 to even 3-2 changes everything)
Maintain defensive playmaking despite key losses
Continue their rushing dominance with a new backfield

The spring practice period will reveal whether this roster reconstruction can maintain Boston College’s upward trajectory in an increasingly competitive ACC.

But one thing’s certain: The numbers show a program with a stronger foundation than the critics realize.

The O’Brien Factor: Beyond the Numbers

Here’s what makes Bill O’Brien’s situation at Boston College fascinating heading into 2025:

Most media outlets focus on the obvious:

His 7-6 record in year one
The Florida State upset
His NFL and Alabama pedigree

But they’re missing the deeper story of what makes a coach successful at BC.

Understanding BC’s Coaching Metrics

At Coaches Hot Seat, we measure coaching performance through two key metrics that you won’t find anywhere else:

MA (Minimum Acceptable Winning Percentage): The baseline winning percentage a coach needs to maintain job security
WPT (Winning Percentage Target): The winning percentage that would make the fanbase genuinely happy

In O’Brien’s case, there’s good news on both fronts:

He exceeded expectations in year one
The Syracuse rivalry win boosted his standing
His 7-6 record (.538) showed immediate improvement

The Contract Situation

While private schools like BC keep contract details close to the vest, here’s what we know about O’Brien’s deal:

Estimated $5 million annual base salary (his highest as head coach)
Contains a unique clause preventing NFL departures
Includes BC’s largest-ever assistant coach salary pool
Features performance incentives backloaded into later years

Why This Matters for 2025

O’Brien’s position heading into 2025 is stronger than most realize:

His seat is cool after beating year one expectations
The Syracuse rivalry win provides breathing room
He hasn’t yet faced other major rivals (Notre Dame, UMass, Holy Cross)
The contract structure suggests BC and O’Brien see this as a long-term relationship

But here’s what makes 2025 crucial: O’Brien must prove year one wasn’t a fluke while managing BC’s most significant roster turnover in years.

The combination of contractual stability and early success gives O’Brien something rare in college football: time to build his program the right way. Whether he can capitalize on that opportunity will define BC’s trajectory for years.

Finally…

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

No related posts found.

VISIT OUR SHOP [COMING SOON]

LOAD MORE BLOG ARTICLES

Blog Article

Ohio State’s Championship Quest – Inside the Buckeye’s 2024 Campaign

Mark Haines on January 18, 2025

The Buckeyes’ 13-2 season demonstrates how, when properly deployed, elite talent can overcome almost any obstacle.

An Aerial Assault That Commands Respect

Will Howard transformed Ohio State’s passing game into one of college football’s most lethal weapons.

The numbers tell the story of aerial dominance:

265.1 passing yards per game
71% completion rate
35 passing touchdowns
Two 900+ yard receivers (Smith: 1,227, Egbuka: 947)
14 touchdowns from Smith alone
10 scores from Egbuka

This passing attack kept defensive coordinators awake at night.

Ground Game: The Perfect Complement

While the passing game grabbed headlines, Ohio State’s rushing attack quietly devastated opponents.

The two-headed monster in the backfield produced consistently:

TreVeyon Henderson: 967 yards at 7.3 yards per carry
Quinshon Judkins: 960 yards at 5.2 yards per carry
Combined for 22 rushing touchdowns
Team average of 163.2 rushing yards per game
The perfect balance to keep defenses honest
Exceptional ability to close out games

This rushing attack turned good drives into great ones.

A Defense Built on Disruption

Ohio State’s defense didn’t just stop opponents – it broke their will to compete.

The defensive dominance showed in multiple ways:

Only 89.9 rushing yards allowed per game
Held runners to 2.7 yards per carry
Generated 51 sacks (led by J.T. Tuimoloau’s 11.5)
Created 111 tackles for loss
Limited opponents to 12 rushing touchdowns all season
Consistently dominated the line of scrimmage

This unit transformed pressure into production.

The Day Factor: Strategic Evolution

Ohio State head coach Ryan Day reacts to a replay during the first half of an NCAA college football game against Michigan Saturday, Nov. 30, 2024, in Columbus, Ohio. (AP Photo/Jay LaPrete)

Ryan Day’s approach to game management reveals a coach willing to adapt and innovate.

His impact manifested in several key areas:

Increased deep passing plays to 15% in playoffs
Implemented the crucial “middle eight” minutes strategy
Moved offensive coordinator to the press box
Created specific roles for key transfers
Developed new film study protocols
Built a “no bad days” culture

Results proved the effectiveness of these changes.

Playoff Performance That Demanded Attention

Ohio State’s postseason run showcased their ability to elevate their game when it mattered most.

Critical adjustments defined their playoff success:

Increased vertical passing attack
Strategic player rotation to maintain freshness
Enhanced coordinator collaboration
Systematic in-game adjustments
Improved third-down conversion rate
Superior momentum management

Each game revealed new depths to their capabilities.

Areas of Concern

Even championship contenders have their vulnerabilities.

Nervous young Latin man using TV remote control on home couch, feeling annoyed, angry, concerned, watching football match, show, getting problems with broadcasting

Key weaknesses that need addressing:

Red zone efficiency (73.3% field goal conversion)
Pass protection issues, especially after key injuries
Secondary vulnerabilities (59.8% completion percentage allowed)
Fourth-quarter defensive fatigue
Below-average punt return game (9.0 yards per return)
Conservative tendencies in crucial moments

These issues provide clear focus areas for improvement.

The Day Difference

Ryan Day’s unique approach to game management sets Ohio State apart.

His distinctive strategies include:

Reframing bye weeks as “improvement weeks”
Increasing playoff game personal involvement
Implementing systematic player rotation
Using innovative analysis tools
Creating accountability systems
Maintaining consistent practice habits

This methodology has proven both effective and controversial.

The Championship Formula

Success in modern college football requires both innovation and tradition.

Ohio State’s formula :

Elite talent development
Strategic adaptability
Cultural consistency
Tactical innovation
Physical dominance
Mental toughness

One question remains: Will this be enough to claim college football’s ultimate prize?

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

Blog Article

Notre Dame’s Path to the National Championship Game

Mark Haines on January 17, 2025

Notre Dame’s Path to the National Championship Game: A 2024 Season Analysis

Notre Dame’s remarkable 14-1 season proves that championship-caliber teams are built on resilience, not perfection.

The Numbers That Define Greatness

One shocking early-season loss to Northern Illinois sparked a historic 13-game winning streak that would carry the Fighting Irish to the national championship game.

The season’s defining statistics tell the story:

405.1 yards of total offense per game
37.0 points scored per game
31 forced turnovers (led FBS)
14.3 points allowed per game (2nd in FBS)
5 wins over ranked opponents
13 consecutive victories

These numbers only scratch the surface of Notre Dame’s dominance.

A Ground Game That Wouldn’t Be Stopped

The Irish rushing attack terrorized defenses with a three-headed monster that few teams could contain.

Consider the devastating ground assault:

Jeremiyah Love: Exploded for 1,122 yards at 7.1 yards per carry, punching in 17 touchdowns
Jadarian Price: Added 733 yards at 6.3 yards per carry with 7 scores
Riley Leonard: The dual-threat QB contributed 866 rushing yards and 16 touchdowns

This relentless ground game opened up opportunities through the air.

Surgical Precision in the Passing Game

While not prolific in volume, Notre Dame’s aerial attack struck with remarkable efficiency.

The passing game’s success came from precision and balance:

Riley Leonard completed 66.4% of his passes for 2,606 yards and 19 TDs
Three receivers topped 350 yards: Collins (458), Greathouse (464), and Evans (369)
Only 8 interceptions thrown in 413 attempts
Steve Angeli provided reliable backup play with 3 TDs and zero turnovers

This efficiency compensated for a relative lack of explosive plays.

A Defense That Suffocated Dreams

Notre Dame’s defense didn’t just stop opponents – it broke their will to compete.

The defensive dominance manifested in multiple ways:

Allowed only 165.3 passing yards per game (2nd nationally)
Forced 31 turnovers to lead FBS
Held opponents to 3.7 yards per carry
Permitted just 14 rushing touchdowns in 15 games
Limited quarterbacks to a 50.7% completion rate

Xavier Watts led this defensive masterpiece with 6 interceptions.

The Freeman Factor: Coaching Excellence

Marcus Freeman’s strategic brilliance transformed Notre Dame from talented to elite.

His impact showed in several key areas:

Aggressive defensive schemes that created havoc
A balanced offensive approach that kept defenses guessing
Superior player development, especially in the secondary
Clutch game management in critical moments
Exceptional ability to rally the team after setbacks

The results speak for themselves.

Season-Defining Victories

Five games shaped Notre Dame’s championship run.

These pivotal moments revealed the team’s character:

Opening statement win at Texas A&M (23-13)
Bounce-back victory over #15 Louisville (31-24)
Dominant win over rival USC (49-35)
Sugar Bowl triumph over #2 Georgia (23-10)
Orange Bowl Classic against #5 Penn State (27-24)

Each victory added another chapter to this historic season.

Room for Growth

Even championship contenders have areas for improvement.

The key weaknesses to address:

Limited explosive plays in the passing game (80th in 10+ yard passes)
Offensive line consistency (38 sacks allowed)
Field goal reliability (57.7% success rate)
Depth concerns at key positions
Red zone efficiency could improve

These shortcomings provide clear opportunities for Ohio State during the National Championship game.

The Path Forward

Notre Dame’s 2024 season has set a new standard for excellence in South Bend.

Consider what this means for the program:

Established themselves as legitimate title contenders
Developed a championship-caliber defense
Built a potent, identity-driven offense
Created a culture of resilience
Positioned themselves for sustained success

The foundation is laid for Notre Dame to remain among college football’s elite.

One question remains: Can the Fighting Irish take the final step and claim their first national championship of the playoff era?

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

Why Texas will beat Ohio State Tonight

Mark Haines on January 10, 2025

Will tonight’s championship matchup between Texas and Ohio State live up to the hype? All signs point to an instant classic in the making.

The Numbers Tell a Story of Perfect Balance

These two football powerhouses couldn’t be more evenly matched on paper. Texas brings its explosive offense (34.3 points per game) against Ohio State’s suffocating defense (12.1 points allowed). The Buckeyes counter with their offensive firepower (36.4 points per game), while Texas’s defense has been equally stingy (15.7 points allowed).

Breaking Down the Offensive Firepower

When you look closer at the offensive numbers, fascinating patterns emerge:

Texas has shown remarkable consistency in the red zone, converting opportunities into touchdowns at a higher rate than their opponents, with 26 rushing touchdowns showcasing their ability to punch it in when it matters most
The Longhorns’ yards per play in playoff games (6.3) demonstrates their explosive potential, consistently creating big plays that change game momentum
Ohio State counters with their own offensive efficiency, particularly in their passing attack, where Smith and Egbuka have combined for over 2,100 receiving yards
The Buckeyes’ balanced attack keeps defenses guessing, with both Henderson and Judkins approaching 1,000-yard rushing seasons

Defensive Chess Match

The defensive side of the ball could ultimately decide this championship showdown:

Texas’s aggressive defense has created an astounding 30 turnovers this season, nearly double Ohio State’s total of 17
The Longhorns’ front seven has consistently generated pressure without needing to blitz, allowing their secondary to focus on coverage
Ohio State’s defensive strength lies in their ability to limit big plays, holding opponents to just 244.6 total yards per game
The Buckeyes’ red zone defense has been particularly impressive, forcing teams to settle for field goals rather than touchdowns

The Transfer Portal’s Hidden Impact

Behind the scenes, the transfer portal has quietly reshaped both rosters heading into this matchup:

Ohio State’s offensive line depth has been particularly affected, with the loss of three linemen, including starter Zen Michalski, potentially impacting their protection schemes
The quarterback situation for the Buckeyes becomes precarious with the departures of both Devin Brown and Air Noland, leaving little room for error
Texas has managed its secondary losses well, maintaining defensive depth despite the departures of Thompson and Catalon
Both teams have shown remarkable resilience in adapting their game plans to account for these personnel changes

The Quarterback Showdown

The battle under center could be one for the history books:

Quinn Ewers has evolved into a complete quarterback for Texas, throwing for 3,189 yards and 29 touchdowns while completing over 66% of his passes
His ability to extend plays and find receivers downfield has been crucial in Texas’s playoff run
Will Howard brings his own impressive resume with 3,490 yards and 32 touchdowns, showing particular strength in reading defensive coverages
Both quarterbacks have shown remarkable poise in crucial moments, with neither throwing an interception in playoff competition

Performance Against Elite Competition

When facing ranked opponents, clear patterns emerge:

Texas has averaged 34.8 points against ranked teams, showing their offense can produce against any level of competition
The Longhorns’ defensive front has been particularly dominant, creating pressure on 37% of passing downs against ranked opponents
Ohio State has demonstrated slight struggles against elite teams, averaging 31.5 points against ranked opponents
The Buckeyes’ running game has seen a noticeable dip in production against ranked teams, averaging 156 yards compared to their season-average

The X-Factor: Turnover Battle

One key statistic jumps off the page: Texas’s ability to create turnovers. With 30 takeaways compared to Ohio State’s 17, the Longhorns’ opportunistic defense could be the difference-maker in a close game.

Prediction: Texas by a Horn

In a game this evenly matched, small advantages loom large. Texas’s superior turnover margin, more balanced offensive attack, and stronger defensive front seven pressure should prove decisive. Look for a classic championship battle, with Texas emerging victorious, 31-27.

The championship trophy will be decided by which team can impose its will in crucial moments. Texas’s momentum and defensive playmaking ability give them the slightest edge in what promises to be an unforgettable title game.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

Notre Dame vs Penn State: A Clash of Titans in the Orange Bowl Semi Final

Mark Haines on January 8, 2025

Thursday, January 9, 2025 | 7:30 p.m. ET

No. 7 Notre Dame vs. No. 6 Penn State

Hard Rock Stadium | Miami Gardens, Florida

In a season where both teams have proven their mettle with identical 13-1 records, Thursday’s College Football Playoff semifinal between Notre Dame and Penn State promises to be a defensive masterclass with championship implications.

The Tale of Two Defenses

Penn State’s defensive unit has been extraordinary this season, holding opponents to a mere 288.8 yards per game. But numbers only tell part of the story.

Their rush defense has been particularly suffocating, allowing just 100.9 yards per game on the ground, forcing teams to abandon their running game early.
With 39 sacks on the season (2.6 per game), they’ve consistently made quarterbacks uncomfortable in the pocket.
The uncertain status of star pass rusher Abdul Carter could impact their defensive prowess, though their depth has been a strength all year.

Notre Dame’s defense matches up impressively, yielding only 295.4 yards per game, with a knack for game-changing plays.

Their opportunistic defense has created 31 takeaways this season, including 18 interceptions.
Safety Xavier Watts has been a ball hawk, securing six interceptions and creating havoc in the secondary.
The loss of cornerback Benjamin Morrison could test their secondary depth against Penn State’s passing attack

Offensive Philosophy: A Study in Contrasts

When Penn State has the ball, expect a balanced attack that keeps defenses guessing.

Quarterback Drew Allar has been efficient and explosive, throwing for 3,192 yards with 24 touchdowns and only seven interceptions.
Running back Nicholas Singleton has been a force, accumulating 1,015 yards and 14 total touchdowns.
Their 436.3 yards per game come from a near-perfect balance of 234.1 passing and 202.2 rushing yards.

Notre Dame’s offense tells a different story, built on a punishing ground game and dual-threat capability.

Transfer quarterback Riley Leonard has been a revelation, passing for 2,383 yards and 18 touchdowns while adding 831 rushing yards
Running back Jeremiyah Love leads the ground assault with 1,076 yards and 18 total touchdowns.
Their 406.6 yards per game lean heavily on the run, averaging 217.5 rushing yards per contest.

The X-Factor: Special Teams and Field Position

Special teams might be the difference-maker in a game that could come down to the finest margins.

Notre Dame holds a slight edge in kickoff returns, averaging 23.9 yards compared to Penn State’s 21.2
Penn State’s kicking game could be compromised with Sander Sahaydak’s status uncertain
Field position battles could prove crucial in what promises to be a defensive struggle

The Prediction

When two evenly matched teams collide, the most minor details often determine the outcome. Penn State’s balanced offensive attack and elite defense give them a slight edge, but Notre Dame’s ability to create turnovers and control the ground game keeps this incredibly close.

Final Score Prediction: Penn State 23, Notre Dame 20

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

The Chess Match: Two Coaches, Two Programs, One Bowl Game Collision – SMU at Penn State

Mark Haines on December 20, 2024

Nobody expected SMU’s Rhett Lashlee to pull off what might be college football’s most remarkable transformation story of 2023.

In just three years, Lashlee has engineered what old-guard football minds considered impossible:

Transforming a middling SMU program into an 11-2 powerhouse
Dominating their inaugural ACC season with swagger and style
Accumulating a jaw-dropping 21-3 conference record that has athletic directors nationwide reaching for their checkbooks

The Established Empire Watches

Meanwhile, in Happy Valley, James Franklin continues orchestrating Penn State’s methodical march toward college football supremacy. His Nittany Lions mirror their coach: disciplined, relentless, and utterly predictable in their pursuit of excellence.

A Tale of Two Systems

What makes this bowl matchup fascinating isn’t just the clash of programs – it’s the statistical symmetry that shouldn’t exist:

The offenses move like twins separated at birth: SMU churning out 443.1 yards per game, Penn State barely ahead at 448.6. But defense? That’s where Franklin’s philosophy reveals itself in cold, hard numbers. His unit surrenders just 282.1 yards per game, while SMU’s gives up 326.1.

The X-Factor That Changes Everything

Here’s where the story takes its dramatic turn. SMU lost quarterback Preston Stone, the architectural centerpiece of their offensive explosion. Into this vacuum steps Kevin Jennings, talented but untested, facing a trial by fire against one of college football’s most sophisticated defensive machines.

The Ground Game Chess Match

Football often reveals its true nature in the running game, and here’s where the contrasts sharpen:

SMU rides Brashard Smith’s explosive 1,270 yards and 14 touchdowns
Penn State counters with a two-headed monster: Nicholas Singleton and Kaytron Allen, combining for over 1,600 yards of controlled destruction.

The Final Act

The smart money sees Penn State emerging victorious, 31-17, not because they’re the better program—but because they’re the more complete program at this precise moment in time. The loss of Stone isn’t just about missing a quarterback; it’s about missing the keystone of an offensive architecture that took three years to perfect.

Ultimately, this game might tell us less about who wins and more about where college football is heading. Lashlee’s SMU represents the bold new challengers, while Franklin’s Penn State embodies the power of systematic, year-over-year excellence. And that’s the real story worth watching.

Game at a Glance

Game: SMU at Penn State

Time: Noon Eastern

TV: TNT

	SMU	Penn State
Record	11-2	11-2
Points Per Game	38.54	34.38
Points Allowed	20.85	16.38
Total Offense	443.1 ypg	448.6 ypg
Total Defense	326.1 ypg	282.1 ypg
SRS Rating	16.66 (8th)	17.20 (6th)
Strength of Schedule	2.51 (49th)	4.20 (30th)

Key Personnel Changes

SMU Impact Losses:

QB Preston Stone (3,471 yards, 27 TDs, 9 INTs)
Kevin Jennings steps in (3,050 yards, 22 TDs, 8 INTs)
CB Jahari Rogers
DL Omari Abor

Penn State Impact Losses:

QB Beau Pribula (275 yards, 5 TDs, 242 rushing yards)
Drew Allar remains the starter (2,894 yards, 21 TDs, 7 INTs)

Key Matchups

Quarterback Battle:
Kevin Jennings must lead SMU’s offense against Penn State’s elite defense that allows only 16.38 points per game

Ground Game:

SMU: Brashard Smith (1,270 yards, 5.9 avg, 14 TDs)
Penn State: Nicholas Singleton (838 yards, 6.4 avg, 7 TDs) and Kaytron Allen (822 yards, 4.8 avg, 6 TDs)

Defensive Edge:
Penn State’s defense allows only 103.6 rushing yards per game and has accumulated 33 sacks.

Final Score:

Penn State 31 SMU 17

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

The Unlikely Revolution: When Indiana Crashed Notre Dame’s Party

Mark Haines on December 19, 2024

Marcus Freeman never saw them coming. Nobody did.

In the strange mathematics of college football, where tradition equals power and history writes the future, Notre Dame’s head coach should be preparing his Fighting Irish for another predictable playoff matchup against Alabama, Georgia, or Michigan. Instead, he finds himself staring across the field at college football’s most improbable revolution: an Indiana Hoosiers team that has turned the sport’s hierarchy on its head.

The Miracle Worker of Bloomington

The man responsible for this upheaval doesn’t look like a revolutionary. Curt Cignetti, with his measured tone and methodical approach, seems more likely to teach advanced calculus than engineer one of the most remarkable turnarounds in college football history. But numbers tell a different story:

An offense that scores 43.33 points per game (3rd nationally)
A defense allowing just 70.8 rushing yards per game (1st nationally)
An 11-1 record that nobody outside Bloomington thought possible

The House That Freeman Built

While Cignetti was busy breaking physics in Indiana, Marcus Freeman was silently rebuilding Notre Dame’s foundation. The results speak volumes:

12.0 points allowed per game
A strength of schedule rating of 3.95 (32nd of 134)
An SRS rating that puts them second in the nation

But what the numbers don’t show is what makes Freeman’s achievement remarkable. He’s transformed Notre Dame from a museum piece of college football history into a modern warfare machine, keeping the gold helmets gleaming.

The Transfer Portal’s Shadow

In the new college football landscape, stability is as fleeting as a teenager’s social media post. Indiana’s revolutionary season has already started showing cracks:

Running back Elijah Green: Gone
Wide receiver Donaven McCulley: Gone
The offensive depth chart: Suddenly looking like a sheet of Swiss cheese

Notre Dame lost cornerback Jaden Mickey, but they’re winning this battle before the first snap in the arithmetic of attrition.

When Systems Collide

What happens when college football’s most unlikely force meets its most immovable object? Indiana’s explosive offense, averaging 438.8 yards per game, crashes into Notre Dame’s defensive wall. The Irish’s battering ram ground attack (224.8 yards per game) meets the nation’s best run defense.

But the real battle isn’t in the statistics. It’s in the collision of two coaching philosophies that shouldn’t work as well as they do:

Cignetti’s offensive innovation that turns conventional wisdom inside out
Freeman’s defensive mastery that makes the modern game look suddenly old-fashioned

The Smart Money Says

The Vegas sharks and the statistical models all point to Notre Dame, giving them a slight edge in a game that promises to be closer than anyone expected. They see Notre Dame’s superior schedule strength (3.95 vs. Indiana’s -0.39) and their battle-tested roster.

But they said Indiana wouldn’t win three games this season.

They said Curt Cignetti was the wrong hire.

They said Marcus Freeman wasn’t ready for Notre Dame.

In a playoff game that defies conventional wisdom, uncertainty is perhaps the only certainty. Notre Dame 31, Indiana 27. Unless, of course, the revolution isn’t quite finished.

The real question isn’t who will win. It’s whether college football will ever be the same after what these two coaches have done to it.

We’ll Break This Down on the Targeting Winners Podcast

If you think this story is wild on paper, wait until you hear what’s happening behind the scenes. Join me and the Targeting Winners crew as we peel back the curtain on this first-round playoff matchup – and uncover the stories the box score doesn’t tell you. We’re talking transfer portal drama, midnight film sessions, and the real reason Indiana’s defense suddenly became impenetrable. Find us late Thursday on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you get your podcasts. Trust me, this one’s worth your commute.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE

The New Economics of College Football: Understanding the Transfer Portal Panic

Mark Haines on December 13, 2024

In two years, college football’s talent market transformed from an orderly command economy into a chaotic free market that would make cryptocurrency traders blush. The New Economics of College Football: Understanding the Transfer Portal Panic examines how over 750 players entering the transfer portal this month isn’t evidence of a broken system – it’s proof of a market finally finding its equilibrium. What looks like chaos to anxious fans refreshing their Twitter feeds is the messy emergence of college football’s first true labor market, complete with hidden negotiations, market-making general managers earning NFL-style salaries, and the type of resource allocation decisions that would make a hedge fund manager sweat. The panic isn’t about dysfunction – it’s about price discovery. And in this new world of college football economics, the only thing more expensive than talent is inexperience in managing it.

Detroit, MI – USA – 10-21-2024: A Wilson football from above on a pile of money

On a crisp December morning, as college football fans refreshed their Twitter feeds with increasing anxiety, Brandon Huffman sat in a Nashville office explaining how the sport they love had fundamentally changed. The 24/7 Sports national recruiting editor wasn’t talking about offensive schemes or defensive alignments – he was describing market dynamics, negotiation strategies, and the emergence of a new power broker in college football: the general manager.

“You’re seeing schools play better defense in terms of keeping the guys that they really want,” Huffman explained, choosing his words carefully. “But you’re also seeing schools playing offense too.” He wasn’t talking about X’s and O’s. He was talking about money.

Welcome to college football’s new reality: over 750 players have entered the transfer portal this year alone. The panic among fan bases is palpable but misplaced. What looks like chaos from the outside is the messy emergence of a more structured market that increasingly mirrors the NFL’s free agency system, just without the benefit of its carefully regulated calendar and certified agent requirements.

The Hidden Market

What fans don’t see – and what’s driving much of their anxiety – is that most of these transfers aren’t surprises to the coaches and administrators involved. “Players’ handlers have been marketing these guys to schools for weeks,” one Power Five administrator admitted. The public announcements that send fans into a frenzy are often merely the formal acknowledgment of deals that have been in quiet negotiation for months.

This hidden market has created a new role in college football: the general manager. Stanford made waves by appointing Andrew Luck to this position, but they’re hardly alone. These GMs are being paid coordinator-level salaries ($500,000+) to manage what has essentially become an NFL-style front office. They’re not just evaluating talent – they’re managing salary caps before they officially exist.

The Price of Talent

The numbers are striking. Elite high school quarterbacks can command seven-figure deals before taking a single collegiate snap. However, the market is increasingly favoring proven production over potential. A quarterback who’s shown success at a lower level (FCS or Group of Five) can often command more than a highly-touted high school prospect who’s spent two years on the bench at a blue-blood program.

“If you’re smart and you play the long game, you might get that back-end deal,” Huffman noted. “But that would mean you’d have to wait three years to get that back-end deal. Most guys are going to jump at the front-end money.”

The Fan Fallacy

When a player enters the portal, fan bases blame the coaching staff. While this instinct is natural, it misunderstands the new economics of college football. Sometimes, a player’s departure isn’t about coaching failure—it’s about resource allocation.

Consider the case of a starting left tackle entering the portal. Fans see a failure to retain talent. The GM sees a financial decision: Is it better to pay the experienced tackle $750,000 or redistribute that money to lock down the promising quarterback and find a cheaper replacement through the portal?

The Development Dilemma

This new market creates interesting incentives around player development. The immediate availability of proven transfers challenges the traditional model of patiently developing talent over several years. Why spend three years developing a backup quarterback when you can acquire one who has already proven themselves at a lower level?

But this shift comes with risks. The constant churn of transfers can disrupt team chemistry and system familiarity. Players jumping from system to system may stunt their development while chasing larger contracts.

The Negotiation Gap

Not every program has embraced the GM model, creating a fascinating dichotomy in handling transfer negotiations. Head coaches often play dual roles at programs without a dedicated GM: talent evaluator and chief negotiator. It’s a precarious position that can create several problems.

First, there’s the time constraint. Head coaches are already among the busiest people in athletics, managing current players, game planning, and traditional recruiting. Adding complex financial negotiations to their plate stretches them even thinner. “When the head coach is your primary negotiator, you’re telling them to be Nick Saban and Jerry Jones simultaneously,” one Power Five assistant noted. “Something’s got to give.”

More importantly, it creates relationship complications. When a head coach directly negotiates compensation with players or their representatives, it fundamentally changes the coach-player dynamic. A coach who has to tell a player they’re not worth their asking price on Tuesday still needs to motivate that player on Saturday. It’s a potentially toxic dynamic that the GM model aims explicitly to avoid.

There’s also the expertise factor. Most head coaches didn’t rise through the ranks by being skilled financial negotiators. They’re football minds, not market makers. When negotiating against professional agents or marketing representatives, they often play an away game without a playbook.

Some programs have tried to bridge this gap by empowering recruiting coordinators or player personnel directors to handle negotiations. However, without a GM’s formal authority and budget control, these stopgap solutions often create more confusion than clarity in the negotiation process.

The Future Market

Revenue sharing is coming to college football, with estimates suggesting teams will have around $20 million to distribute among players. Many believe this will calm the current chaos by standardizing payment structures. The reality is likely more complex.

“The rich will still get richer,” Huffman predicted, “because the collectives are still going to be involved.” Revenue sharing won’t replace NIL deals – it will layer on top of them, creating an even more complex market for GMs to navigate.

Successful programs will develop clear strategies for this new market. Some will focus on high school recruitment and development, accepting that they’ll lose some players to transfer but betting on their ability to develop new talent. Others will embrace the portal, treating it as their primary talent pipeline. Most will likely land somewhere in between, but all must be more transparent with their players about their market value and team-building strategy.

The transfer portal isn’t chaos – it’s a market finding equilibrium. The panic it creates comes not from its dysfunction but from our unfamiliarity with its new rules. For fans, the best advice might be the simplest: calm down, let it play out, and trust that this year’s “crisis” is just next year’s normal.

BACK TO THE BLOG ARCHIVE