College v. Pro

[JackWhite]

tdarko, I thought I'd get some outside opinion on this debate. I sent e-mails to some football writers and asked them the question about the point spread between 2005 Houston Texans and 2005 USC Trojans. I've gotten one reply so far. This is from Richard Cirminiello at college football news.com (cirmrt@mindspring.com):

"That's a tough question, but I love it. I'd have to say Texans laying double-digits. Maybe as much as 16 or 17. People underestimate the gap between a pro and college team, even one as good as SC or as bad as Houston. What were your thoughts on this?"

It is early, but score one for me. I thought it would be in this same range, not 35+. I'll let you know what the other writers say when/if they respond.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
This is from Richard Cirminiello at college football news.com

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? And this guy knows this how? He has probably never played a sport, let alone a professional sport in his life...please o' please tell me why I should take his opinion seriously.

Even if he happens to write for a credible magazine, what would that matter as well? There are many retards that write for ESPN. What does this prove? That some guy who favors college is going to shade towards the college side of the argument?

Anyway, I have a bus to catch. I will check this tonight.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is from Richard Cirminiello at college football news.com

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? And this guy knows this how? He has probably never played a sport, let alone a professional sport in his life...please o' please tell me why I should take his opinion seriously.

Even if he happens to write for a credible magazine, what would that matter as well? There are many retards that write for ESPN. What does this prove? That some guy who favors college is going to shade towards the college side of the argument?


[/ QUOTE ]

Dude said that the Texans would be favored by 17.

My opinion: the pro team would win 99 times out of 100. But you never know. The ball bounces the right way, get some unfortunate fumbles, and it could go to the Trojans.

[Terrabon98]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I know for a fact that the Texans of last year were better than USC, so then yes they would be greater than a 35+ favorite to win. I also know that they were better than Texas as well. You mention 4 or 5 guys (on the USC team) at the end of your post as if that is all that it takes to beat an NFL team. Maybe you should be reminded that only one of those guys has even a "chance" at being successful/dominant in the NFL his first year or first game, since it would be all of these teeny bobbers and young twenty somethings first game against HOF'ers and veterans. The the other forty plus guys on the team, what about them? The guys that are too slow to block for these guys, or too slow or not powerful to stop an NFL team on downs? Remember it is a team game, not a 4 man show, and the NFL team has an entire TEAM of guys like the 4-5 you mention. That is the difference. I still can't believe you are trying to argue that this would even be close.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the crux of the argument for me, and it always has been. People seem to equate having 4 or 5 great college players to mean that you can compete with a professional team. Guess what? THe ENTIRE professional team were once great college players just like these guys, except they are the ones that panned out. There are plenty of great college studs who go pro and you never even hear from them again. Add in the experience, size, strength, etc. and I honestly do not see how it could even be remotely close.

The friend who I initially debated this with has since backed down from saying that a college team would be a favorite to saying that he thinks they could win 2 or 3 times out of 10. I still think this is way too often, and would maybe say 1 out of 100 at best.

[FlyWf]

You're hugely overestimating the effect of coaching and chemistry and vastly underestimating the effect of depth. USC's stars are NFL caliber players, but their special teamers and backups would get blown off the field. Houston's O-line would wear down USC's defensive front and by the end of the game the Texans would be running at will.

[JackWhite]

[ QUOTE ]
Huh? And this guy knows this how? He has probably never played a sport, let alone a professional sport in his life...please o' please tell me why I should take his opinion seriously.

Even if he happens to write for a credible magazine, what would that matter as well? There are many retards that write for ESPN. What does this prove? That some guy who favors college is going to shade towards the college side of the argument?

Anyway, I have a bus to catch. I will check this tonight.

[/ QUOTE ]

He probably hasn't played a professional sport in his life. But here is a newsflash, neither have any of the guys who set the lines in vegas. So is their opinion uselss as well? It simply is an opinion of a guy whose job it is to cover football. You think he is biased because he writes for a college football publication. Ok, here is the second response from the dozen or so e-mails I sent. This is from Eric Edholm who writes for PRO FOOTBALL WEEKLY:

"I am forwarding this on to Mike Wilkening, our resident handicapper.
Though
I am not sure if he can help you, I would venture to guess that his
opinion
on this would be better than mine.

Off the top of my head, maybe USC would have been favored by 3-4
points,
maybe as high as 5. I think college home-field advantage usually counts
for
3.5 points, besides exceptional cases (longer than normal travel, i.e.
Hawaii; unusual home-field advantage, etc.).

Hope this helps.

ee"


So Eric thinks USC would be favored. As previously noted, I disagree with this. But I am still looking for a response that agrees with your 35+ point spread. I will keep you up to date as more responses come in.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is from Richard Cirminiello at college football news.com

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? And this guy knows this how? He has probably never played a sport, let alone a professional sport in his life...please o' please tell me why I should take his opinion seriously.

Even if he happens to write for a credible magazine, what would that matter as well? There are many retards that write for ESPN. What does this prove? That some guy who favors college is going to shade towards the college side of the argument?


[/ QUOTE ]

Dude said that the Texans would be favored by 17.

My opinion: the pro team would win 99 times out of 100. But you never know. The ball bounces the right way, get some unfortunate fumbles, and it could go to the Trojans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or the right referees....

b

[JackWhite]

tdarko, here is an update. So far I have received 6 e-mail responses to the question of the point spread of a USC vs. Houston Texans game.

1 from a College Football News writer, 2 from PRO Football Weekly writers, 2 from The Sporting News writers, and 1 from Nolan Dalla. If you don't recognize the name, Nolan wrote the Stu Ungar autobiography, writes for CardPlayer, and is the former WSOP media relations director. He is also a long time football handicapper.

Here are the results:

Texans -21 (TSN's Tom Dienhart)
Texans -21 (TSN's Vinnie Iyer)
Texans -16 or 17 (College Football News Rich Cirmiriello)
Texans -10 (Nolan Dalla)
USC - 3 or 4 (Pro Football Weekly's Eric Edholm)
USC -6 (Pro Football Weekly's Jeff Reynolds)

What is ironic is that the two guys who liked USC were the two writers from Pro Football Weekly. I hope you won't accuse them of bias?

I know you will probably dismiss all of these people as unqualified dorks whose opinions are worthless, but I feel better about my arguments after receiving their thoughts.

The most thoughtful response so far was from Nolan Dalla. Here it is in case you were interested in his full argument.

"Great question. I go back to the "College All Star Game" which took place when the NFL champ would play a team of College All Stars in Chicago every year. This game was played in the 1950s up until about the early 1980s the samw week as the Hall of Fame game in preseason, and has mostly been forgotten since. Typically, the NFL team would be favored by about 10 points.

I would normally adjust that line somewhat, as USC was better than a college all-star team (because of cohesiveness and chemistry), and the Texans would certainly be worse than the NFL champs. However, because the game has also changed in terms of pros being so much bigger, stronger, and faster -- this likley neutralizes arguements that USC is close in talent to the Texans.

Finally, keeping mind that the line is not a prediction of the outcome of the game, but rather the PERCIEVED differences of the two teams, I expect that USC would get more volume bets than the Texans.

GIven these factors, I put the line at HOU -10. That's a good starting number, becausing moving off the 10 to 9.5 ot 10.5 would immediately tell us which side has more value. But I can't make a rational arguement to start it at 9 or 11, either -- so 10 seems right on.

I'd be curious to know your thoughts and what other might think also.

-- Nolan"

[Terrabon98]

Hmm interesting...I guess some sports writers think it's a lot closer than I do. I am shocked the pro writers gave the edge to USC

[JackWhite]

tdarko, another quick update. A seventh reply, and this one is closer to you. Tom Danyluk of Pro Football Weekly says Texans -24.