To the Campus Community:

We are just weeks away from the November 4 election, and I am writing to encourage you to take part.  Voting is one of the core responsibilities of every eligible U.S. citizen.  It gives us the opportunity to make our voices heard by choosing the leaders and deciding on the issues that will shape California and the United States for the next generation.

In order to vote, you must register by October 20.  If you have changed your permanent address, name or party affiliation since the last election, you must re-register.  Several helpful links to registration and election information are posted at the California Secretary of State’s Web site, www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections.htm.

In addition to the presidential contest, Californians will choose among candidates for U.S. Congress and state offices, and decide several important statewide ballot initiatives.  I encourage you to learn as much as you can about the candidates and the California propositions in the days ahead and to exercise your right to vote on November 4.

Sincerely,

Gene D. Block
Chancellor

Remember, if you vote in November’s election, you’re part of the problem.  You sell America down the river every time you participate in the process.  By voting or pretending that the democratic process has any positive effect, you legitimize a system in which morons are not only allowed, but encouraged to choose our future as a nation.  The only relevant policies are those which limit procreation and expose democracy as a farce in which the great unwashed forces every aspect of society to absorb its stench.  Idiocracy is here, and participation in the process only entrenches it and supports its legitimacy.  Don’t be fooled.

“The Cubs probably will not play .500 ball.  Much more realistic would be a record of oh, say, 39-28.  At that point, the Cards have to go 43-23, which is nearly winning 2 of 3 the rest of the way.  44-23 for Milwaukee.  Again, possible, but how likely is that?”

The Cubs actually went 40-26, with Hurricane Ike winning the other one. Milwaukee went 38-29 in the second half, which was exactly one game short of what they would have needed to win the Central if Chicago had played .500 ball. The Cards went 33-33, presuming they finish this rout today. Let this serve notice: statistics and probabilities matter. It is really hard to make up five games, particularly when the leader is the better team. Don’t buy the hype, and do not listen to your heart.

“Coming into today’s action, the Cubs were right on their Pythagorean record.  St. Louis and Milwaukee were both three games lucky, which means that the Cubs should really be leading by eight right about now.  As we saw above, the actual records of the teams involved in the Central race are highly suggestive of a Chicago victory.  Pythagorean records are significantly more predictive of future performance than actual records, and these are even more heavily in favor of Chicago. “

Right again, as Chicago was unlucky, the Cards and Brewers were a little lucky, and the Cubs clinched a week ago. This stuff matters.

You’ve simply got to consider stuff like that when you’re thinking about whether your team is likely to catch up. The best team in baseball almost never wins two games out of three…..and the wishful thinking of fans often assumes that their team will do better than that for an extended stretch. Don’t fall into the trap of Idiocracy: hope, but make your hope an enlightened hope.

“So, how will the division finish?  I think Chicago wins this division by about ten games, clocking in anywhere between 95 and 100 wins.  The Cards and Brewers will both finish around the 85 win mark.  I’d give a slight edge to Milwaukee in the division and wild card race, simply because I think more Cardinals are playing over their heads right now.”

Pretty darn close. I didn’t think Milwaukee could make ninety wins, but they just did get there today. The basic point still stands: Chicago is an elite team, and the Cards and Brewers are slightly above average to good. The numbers count.

Playoff predictions tomorrow, or whenever we know who will be in the playoffs.

9 AM – Northwestern at Iowa. I’m not picking this game because I’ve seen neither team and don’t know much about it. I will say this: Iowa must win this game. If they don’t, their season’s ruined. They must bounce back from the loss at Pitt to beat a Big Ten bottom dweller at home. If they don’t, it will be a long season in Iowa City. Might be anyway.

12:30 PM – Arkansas at Texas. Texas may very well drop a holy beatdown on the Hogs. Texas is much more athletic across the board and I see no way in the world that Arkansas will score much. Horns 48, Arkansas 10.

12:30 PM – Colorado at FSU. Colorado isn’t there yet. They’ve been billed as a potential spoiler for a while now, but they’re much less dangerous on the road than in Boulder. This is the same team that really should have lost to FCS opposition two weeks ago and should have lost at home to a down WVU team last Thursday. That said, FSU has many of the same problems. I’m sticking with the Seminoles at home, but really would not be surprised by nearly anything. FSU 20, CU 17.

12:30 PM – Fresno St. at UCLA. Who is going to show up? Can’t tell, but I’m pretty sure FSU should shut down the UCLA run game, and we know they can’t throw. I think FSU is better than Arizona, so somewhat improved play from UCLA won’t likely help. Bulldogs 30, Bruins 13.

4:00 PM – TCU at Oklahoma. Here we go: a real test for the Sooners. People thought that Cincy game would be close, but I knew better. People seem to be sleeping on this one, and I know better. TCU will give Oklahoma a game and will be, by far, the best opposition the Sooners will see until Texas week. There will still be too much Oklahoma offense: I don’t see how TCU is going to hold OU down, and they’re definitely not winning a shootout. Sooners 41, Horned Frogs 20. But don’t be surprised if it’s a little bit closer than this.

4:45 PM – Alabama at Georgia. There are going to be some flat-out hits dropped in this one. Certainly the best game of the day and a major measuring stick for both teams. Neither side has a particularly strong offense, but I think John Parker Wilson will struggle much more than Stafford in this one, and that will be enough to carry UGA to the home win. Georgia 20, Alabama 10.

5:00 PM – Illinois at Penn State. Penn State should carry the day here. They’ve been strangely competent on offense and Illinois’ D is decidedly unimpressive. The winner of this one has a shot at the Big Ten, the loser is looking at the Alamo Bowl. Nittany Lions 34, Illini 24.

5:00 PM – Virginia Tech at Nebraska. Another game that should see some hitting. I feel Nebraska matches up very well here, as V-Tech doesn’t do enough on offense to exploit Nebraska’s talent deficiencies here. The Nebraska offense will do enough to see the Huskers through at home. Great to see Nebraska playing in primetime: get it done, Bo. Cornhuskers 24, Hokies 13.

1) He dominates the NL in nearly every relevant offensive category.  He is second to Chipper in OBP at .453, leads the league with a pornographic .631 slugging percentage, and has a lot of batting average and RBIs, if you care about stupid stats.  If you like decent stats, he leads the NL by 13 Runs Created and leads the league in batting wins and offensive winning percentage.  Basically, he’s a monster at the plate.

2) He is the best defensive first baseman in the game, and among the top defenders in baseball.  Pujols has committed only five errors (another stupid stat), which is tied for best among NL 1B qualifiers.  He leads the league in revised zone rating and is tied for third in out of zone plays (both of the people who have more OOZ plays than Albert have significantly worse numbers in their zone, indicating erratic defense).  Pujols has saved heaven knows how many errors at first base.  It’s not often that the best bat in the league is also the best glove in the league.

3) If you believe in stupid stuff like “intangibles” (which are always then made tangible through nonsensical analysis), Pujols finishes first there too.  On a team that was supposed to win 70 games, Pujols performed well enough to keep the team in contention through mid September.  Pujols is widely acclaimed as one of the hardest workers in baseball and is an amazing influence in the community.  He’s one of the best baserunners in the game.  Despite hitting for outstanding power, he’s one of the toughest strikeouts in the league.  Basically, if you like to define value properly, Pujols wins in a walk.  If you like stupid stuff, Pujols wins that too.  So why is it that at least half of these morons who call themselves “writers” will vote for someone else?  We’ve got a few other candidates in the mix: Ryan Howard, Lance Berkman, Chase Utley, C.C. Sabathia, and Manny Ramirez.  Let’s take those in turn.

RYAN HOWARD

OK, so he’s got a nice smile and craps inner city ballparks.  The only argument for Howard over Pujols is his power: nobody hits for more power than Ryan Howard (or so the legend goes).  But has anybody checked the numbers?  He does have twelve more dingers and thirty more RBI.  However, a much better measure of power is isolated power, which is calculated by subtracting batting average from slugging percentage.  This shows you how hard the batter hits the ball when he hits it, eliminating all those nasty times when he doesn’t.  Here’s a shocker: Howard’s IsoP is .284, Albert’s .283.  They’ve got exactly the same power.  The difference is Pujols provides that power a whole lot more often, crapping doubles while Howard’s crapping cheeseburgers.  And how would you compare the non-power elements of Howard’s game to those same element’s of Albert’s?  Show yourself out.

Q: How do you turn Ryan Howard into Albert Pujols?

A: Add twenty walks, seventeen doubles, and thirty one hits.  Turn lousy defense into the best defense in the league.  Turn a useless baserunner into one of the best.  Subtract eighty plate appearances and seventy pounds.

LANCE BERKMAN

This is a thinking man’s argument.  Lance Berkman is one hell of a player, and Ryan Howard is not fit to carry his jock (at least in 2008).  Berkman finishes a bit behind Pujols in all of the defensive metrics.  The problem is that Berkman is still giving up thirty points of OBP and seventy points of SLG.  He’s a good player, a great player even, but a touch behind Albert in every way, and he plays the same position.  Lance has a great case as the second best player in the league.  He is not the best.

CHASE UTLEY

Utley’s offense lags well behind Albert: he’s giving up seventy points of OBP and a hundred points of SLG despite a much better home ballpark.  The only real argument for Utley is that he has more positional value, which is indisputable.  He might well be the best defensive second baseman in the NL, which is an outstanding point in his favor.  However, it isn’t enough to make up a whopping advantage in Albert’s offensive numbers.  Think of it this way: the offensive difference between Albert Pujols and Chase Utley is pretty much the same as the difference between Chase Utley and Kelly Johnson.  Playing second base doesn’t make that go away.

C.C. SABATHIA

Good night, this is a stupid argument.  But I’ll crush it anyway.  Albert Pujols is sixty eight runs better than the league average hitter.  Over his time in the National League, Sabathia has been about thirty four runs better than the NL average pitcher.  Over the whole season, Sabathia has been about fifty runs better than the average pitcher.  Albert wins easily…..oh crap.  I forgot to mention that Albert is also the best defensive player at his position.  And the baserunning.  And everything else.

MANNY RAMIREZ

OK, so he’s been great for the Dodgers.  Over the whole season, he’s been fourteen runs worse than Albert compared to the league average.  Game over.  And you want to compare their defensive value?  Maybe you think Manny stabilizes a clubhouse while Albert destroys one?  Well, I guess that’s an empirical question…..I don’t even know how you’d evaluate that…..

East Carolina – B. They lost their quest for the BCS, and are not likely to get it back. But NC State actually played a pretty nice game and ECU probably should have won this one anyway. They did nice work and should still go to the C-USA title game. Sadly, the banner has passed to BYU, TCU, Tulsa, and possibly Utah as BCS busters.

NC State – B+. They looked better than advertised. They were able to compete physically and make some plays on offense. The ACC is wide open, and I see no reason that NCSU can’t finish above .500 in conference play with a few breaks.

UCLA – D. The offensive ineptitude continues. There are reasons for that, but Arizona looked like the clear superior, and Arizona is not all that good. The UCLA defense doesn’t look bad, but the Tennessee game looks more and more like an aberration. The UCLA D has looked good in the past and is certainly the strongest part of the team. Still, they’re not good enough to pitch shutouts against the top half of the Pac-10, and without offensive improvement, they’re headed for a sub-.500 season for sure.

Arizona – B-. I just don’t feel that strongly about their performance. They rung up a team that couldn’t hit back. They did execute and the game was not competitive, so they get credit for that. However, they made some mistakes, and a better team would have certainly capitalized. On the other hand, a better team would probably simply dominate Arizona anyway.

Texas A&M – D. Their defense was outmanned and Miami got to the corners at will. Their secondary was OK, but Miami receivers were able to get open underneath. On offense, they looked lost. They’ll get some plays out of Goodson and the quarterbacking will improve, but there’s no way they’ll pass in the Big XII. Sure, Goodson will rush for a thousand yards, but it will not be enough to stave off conference beatdowns.

Miami – A-. The defense looked very solid and A&M really only produced on a few broken plays and a few sparks from Goodson. The offense definitely evolved, although we’ve yet to know whether the A&M defense is responsible for that. They created big holes in the running game and worked their short passing game with great effectiveness. The only thing I need to see is a vertical passing attack. If they can put that together, I see no reason that UM can’t win the ACC.

LSU – A. Boy, this team looked tough. Their offense was better than expected against a tough defense and on the road to boot. The defense wasn’t perfect, but still very solid. This team is a national title contender if ever there were one. Very, very impressive.

Auburn – A-. OK, they lost at home. Whatever. They are a damn good football team. The offense is progressing, although they did only score 14 points. The defense was good and it took some phenomenal play from LSU to unlock them. This was the best game of the year and Auburn was right in it. Either LSU or Auburn would walk through the Big Ten, ACC, and Big East with no trouble at all. More validation for the SEC in a terrific Saturday nighter. Can’t wait for next week.

Georgia – A-. A strong performance, although I wonder why UGA’s offense didn’t do a little more. The UGA defense was very impressive and UGA dealt with the hostile environment well. ASU played a decent game and served as a good test. To be honest, I think nearly any SEC road trip is at least as tough as going to ASU, but convincing wins on the road are never a bad thing. You got the sense that Georgia never really got out of first gear and never needed to do so.

Arizona State – B-. You expected worse? Well, they hung around the game despite the clear disparity, and wouldn’t that performance beat any Pac-10 team other than Oregon or USC? Isn’t a shot at the Holiday Bowl pretty much the goal for ASU? I was pretty impressed by how they handled the UGA running game and this is going to translate well to the Pac-10. USC and Oregon will move the ball on them, but the ASU defense should be good enough to get them six or seven conference wins, particularly when Rudy Carpenter isn’t facing SEC defenses.

But this time, I was shocked. When you think of Van Morrison, you think of “Brown Eyed Girl” and that’s about it. And it’s a cool, jangly little song and all, but why would you think Van Morrison’s all that much different from, say, Jackson Browne? Well, you’d think that because you’re uneducated, and I can thankfully report that I got religion yesterday. Many have praised Astral Weeks as a particularly strong effort, and many have called it one of the finest pop albums ever made. I was very skeptical of this evaluation prior to listening, as I just didn’t hear the brilliance in the stuff I’d heard before.

Well, I heard it here. I don’t think a track by track review would really do justice to the creative work I heard here: there was no filler and the transcendent beauty of the album becomes clear before the first track ends. I was actually sad when the album ended, and that’s how you know it’s great. What a terrific effort. You need to listen if you haven’t yet.

Too much ink has been spilled in making the obvious point that there are now two power conferences in college football. The ACC and Big East are, clearly, little better than the mid-major conferences at this point, and the Big Ten is well on its way. The Pac-10 has one legitimate power, one solid team (Oregon), and eight enormous question marks. So this is factually true, and anyone other than a huge Wisconsin or Clemson fan can probably concede the point. I’m more concerned with why that’s true. Why are the SEC and Big XII now the only serious power conferences? I can think of at least three reasons.

1. Traditional power + solid management = the top of the conference. Any power conference needs the top of the conference to perform and do so consistently. The SEC has Florida, Georgia, LSU, and Auburn as strong programs under effective, consistent management. Tennessee is struggling. These are the bluebloods. The Big XII is actually somewhat thin here: Oklahoma and Texas are way up, while Nebraska and Texas A&M are struggling. The Pac-10 has a strong squad with big tradition in USC. Ohio State qualifies in the Big Ten, and Penn State probably does too. In the ACC, there are probably no teams that qualify. In the Big East, West Virginia is the only team that comes close, and I don’t even really see that. There is simply more tradition and allure in the Pac-10, Big Ten, Big XII, the ACC, and the SEC, which makes recruiting and facility improvements much less daunting. The Big Ten and ACC have a number of traditional powers underachieving (Miami, Florida State, Clemson, Michigan, and Iowa, to name a few). This alone makes it very difficult to make up the difference. This, of course, is an obvious point, but too many people buy into the BCS/non-BCS distinction without considering the reality that if a conference’s power teams are having trouble, it is very difficult to make up the gap. The resurgence of Missouri and Kansas has redeemed the Big XII North, but the difficulties of Nebraska and Colorado made the Big XII North a joke as recently as 2006. Generally, you need your heavyweights to answer the bell.

2. A total lack of innovation. This is really the problem with the Big Ten. Rich Rodriguez will be a great coach in that league, and the reason is because nobody has had a new idea in that league in a long, long time. The top teams have had playmakers lately, but they don’t get the ball in creative ways. Consider the difference between the way that Florida used its playmakers and Ohio State used theirs two years ago. Big Ten offenses look slow and clueless when faced with superior opposition. There are exceptions, but the difference is real, and Ohio State’s misfortunes just happen to be the most obvious example. The Big Ten can still slug it out in the trenches, but sometimes you need to do a little more. The same is true of ACC teams and most of the Pac-10: these offenses are not innovative. I don’t mean they should chase the spread wherever it leads or embrace whatever the fad is. Oklahoma has run at least four different offenses in the Stoops era: a Mike Leach/Steve Spurrier Fun n’ Gun (1999-2001), a pro style attack, a spread/zone blocking scheme, and the no huddle adaptation of this year. You don’t need to fit a particular mold, but you do need to be doing different things and coming up with ideas. Texas doesn’t do anything too crazy, but they’re always tinkering, always changing.

3. Talent issues. The Big Ten, most of the ACC, and most of the Big East don’t recruit well in the best talent pools, which are basically CA, TX, FL, and the deep South. This is where the best high school talent goes and they’re all going to SEC schools, Big XII schools, and USC. Watch Rich Rodriguez: he will use his more national name and style to bring top talent to Michigan, and they will begin to dominate their league.

This debate really doesn’t mean much in the big picture. These things are going to change: the Big Ten and ACC will adapt, their traditional powers will be back, and other things will change around the country. Who knows what program is headed for a fall? Of the top national title contenders this year (USC, Oklahoma, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Missouri), over half weren’t anywhere near that ten years ago. So there’s no need to decide that the sport has permanently shifted. However, the amazing difficulties faced by SEC and Big XII teams should make any pollster think twice about voting a Big XII or Big East team ahead of a remotely comparable team from either of those conferences. It’s not just that the SEC/Big XII teams have to beat three elite opponents instead of none or one: it’s that every single week is harder. Instead of going to Minnesota, you have to go to Oklahoma State or Ole Miss. Instead of facing UConn, you’ve got to play Arkansas or Kansas State. Instead of playing Arizona, you’re looking at Texas Tech or South Carolina. It’s just a tougher league, and it’s tougher every single day. Hell, even Baylor, the worst team in the Big XII, absolutely dominated the worst team in the Pac-10. The best college football is being played east of the Rockies and south of the Mason-Dixon line, with the exception of south central Los Angeles.

California – D.  This is the same old Cal: disappointing at every turn, never sustaining themselves at a high level, never succeeding in the clutch, never playing defense for four whole quarters.  They’ll go to a bowl, and they might even win it, but heaven help them if they end up in the Holiday Bowl against Big XII opposition.

Maryland – B.  They looked like they’re ready to be in the top half of the ACC this year, but what kind of achievement is that?  I thought Cal played badly more than Maryland played well.  Their defense was able to be exploited all day and they didn’t play particularly well on offense.  They’re better than the bottom half of the ACC, but I honestly don’t even see them contending for the conference this year.  A step forward, but a small step.

Kansas – B-.  They’re the real deal, in the sense that they’re ready to be a legitimate force in the Big XII.  That’s there.  What isn’t there is that next step that will enable them to stay there for a long time and compete with top flight opposition.  They played an OK game on the road, but if you can’t run against South Florida, I’m really not sure how you’re going to run on Oklahoma or Texas.  They’re a good, solid, 5-3 type team in the Big XII.  There’s nothing to be ashamed of……but they’re not quite ready for the big leagues of the Big XII.

South Florida – B+.  They looked like the best team in the Big East, and I doubt anyone in the country would completely have their way with them.  Nevertheless, this is a team that would have a very tough time competing in a BCS bowl.  KU isn’t quite up to the talent levels of the Oklahomas, Floridas, and LSUs of the world, and USF still had a lot of trouble holding serve despite some very fortunate occurrences.  Good win and a real step forward, but there is work to be done.

MIchigan – F.  They did not execute well at all.  They handed Notre Dame a game that nobody deserved and they were not able to do anything well.  This was a step back.  I stand by what I said: Michigan has a future and Notre Dame, as of now, still does not.  But Michigan isn’t moving toward that future until they learn to hold onto the ball and play tougher defense.

Notre Dame – C-.  A win is a win is a win, and they were better this week than last.  But they didn’t beat Michigan: Michigan beat Michigan, and Notre Dame happened to be innocent bystanders.  Still, there is something to be said for not giving up what you’ve been given.  Indeed, I suspect that last year’s Fighting Irish would have found a way to drop this one too.  A step forward…..but a very small step.

Georgia – B.  I thought they played OK and were just in a dogfight with a tough South Carolina team in a hostile environment.  This is the SEC, friends, and they played some good ball.  I like Stafford and Moreno, but I think they’re a playmaker short: every Sooner, Gator, or Trojan on the field can burn you.  Can you say the same for the Bulldogs?  I really don’t think you can.  This team is a legit threat to run the table, but they are also legitimately capable of losing four games.  Wait and see……but don’t hold today against them if you know anything about college football.

South Carolina – B.  Their defense is legitimately capable of competing with the big boys.  Their offense is not.  Who thought you’d say that of a Steve Spurrier team?  They’re going to be OK, but they need some playmakers and Spurrier needs a quarterback he can trust.  Then again, maybe a quarterback needs a Spurrier he can trust…….

Oklahoma – A-.  Still some special teams and secondary concerns, but these guys looked unstoppable at times.  Absolutely dominant, and great to see that happening on the road.  Oklahoma plays at a different speed than anybody else in the college game and I see no reason to believe that they can’t run the table.  They’ll need to play just a little bit sharper in order to navigate the Big XII, but it can happen.  Get to work and get it done.

Washington – D.  Look, they’re headed in the right direction.  They really are.  I swear it.  But they were standing on the tracks and the train came through, and I suspect some hotshot young assistant will get the credit for turning UW around.  Jake Locker is a player, and I was sorry to see him take the beating he took.

USC - A.  I’m actually not 100% sold: Mark Sanchez isn’t quite there for me, but there was nothing to complain about.

Ohio State – D-.  Separate post forthcoming.

He patrolled center field with a grace that hardly anyone remembers.  Only a shoulder surgery forced him into left field, and I’d argue that even the weak armed Lankford was a better center fielder than most.  And oh, my, how he could hit.  He posted a career OPS+ of 122 – friends, that’s the equal of Tony Perez, Paul Molitor, and Jeff Kent, and none of those three were among the better defensive center fielders of their time.  Two of those three are Hall of Famers, and Kent probably will be (although all three are marginal at best), but nobody’ll ever shed a tear for old Ray.  Why, I’ll never know: Ray Lankford was a better ballplayer than all three of ‘em.  I hope that at least one of those writers checks the box.

Ray’s 41 now, and presumably doing fine.  I always regretted the way he left St. Louis, and wish it had worked out differently at the end.  There was still a little life left in his bat in 2004, even though he was run out of St. Louis: the guy still posted league-average offensive numbers and scored thirty six of the runs that helped us win the pennant that year.  I wish he’d been able to get his ring, but it just never worked out.  Same way with Tom Pagnozzi, and Donovan Osborne, and Brian Jordan, and all of my other heroes from that time.  I guess there’s more 83-79 than pennant winner in all of us.

I don’t know why I thought about Ray Lankford tonight.  Maybe this team reminds me of the 1993 Cards, or maybe seeing Josh Phelps, Cesar Izturis, and Felipe Lopez in the same lineup made me a little wistful.  Maybe a 10-2 beating inspires thoughts that aren’t altogether rational.  But I’m glad I remembered old Ray, and I hope he’s doing well.