On the 2025 college football season

 On USC

Going into last season I was very low on USC. I felt confident that a team with Lincoln Riley, a 4th year quarterback, and a wide receiver room stacked with former elite high school recruits would put up points in bunches; however, I did not think they would be able to field a power-4 (let alone superpower-2) level defensive line, and that the big ten would grind them to mush. The season ended up playing out almost the opposite of what I expected. 

The offense was capable but fatally inconsistent. Lincoln Riley's great innovation was figuring out how to marry power running schemes with the air raid passing concepts; the irony is that Riley may not actually be the best operator for the machine he created. Last year USC was extremely efficient at running the ball and mediocre at passing the ball. This doesn't mean they should turn into 3 yards and a cloud of dust, but it does mean that the running game was vastly underutilized. The result was an offense that looked pretty good on paper but struggled to finish drives and chew clock, which is what allowed inferior teams to stay closer than they should have. The pass-happy approach might have worked if wide receiver room had played up to its ceiling. Ja'Kobi Lane and Makai Lemon were spectacular, but Zach Branch and Duce Robinson didn't play anywhere close to their 5-star ratings. With a more dynamic quarterback that might've been enough to carry the offense, but they needed to strike gold on all four of those guys to be able to get away with Riley's lack of balance.

On the other hand, the defensive coaching staff blew me away with the turnaround. The 2023 Grinch defense is one of the worst college defenses I have ever seen; the fact that this staff only needed a year to put together a passable defense (despite being paper thin on the defensive line) is a miracle. Unfortunately however, Grinch's subpar recruiting and incomprehensible preference for undersized body types put a hard ceiling how much the defense could improve. This was a well-coached, fundamentally sound defense that inevitably wore down late in close games due to their physical limitations (and exacerbated by the offense's inability stretch leads or kill clock). I feel fully confident in the schematic and developmental ability of the defensive staff.

It's easy to talk myself into this year being a huge step forward. Jayden Maiava now has four games plus a full offseason under his belt, and his physical abilities will unlock parts of Lincoln Riley's system that Miller Moss couldn't really execute. They have two first round talents are receiver, and Waymond Jordan looks like a transfer portal steal. They finally have the quality and quantity of bodies that this scheme need on the interior defensive line. They have too many NFL-caliber players at edge rusher to continue having pass rush problems. Desman Stephens and (when healthy) Eric Gentry are studs at linebacker. Getting Kamari Ramsey to return is found money, and with another year in this scheme he has All-American potential. I also think having Bishop Fitzgerald there to handle deep coverage will allow this staff to utilize Ramsey as a more versatile chess piece that better optimizes his skills.

And yet...I still have questions. They don't have enough speed at corner, which will limit what coverages thay can run. The offensive line is painfully thin on experience. I do appreciate that this staff has put an emphasis on bringing in bodies on the offensive line after years of Helton neglecting that position, but this year will be a referendum on the staff's ability to actually develop the players they recruited. And even if the offensive line gels...will Riley actually be willing to actually lean on the running game if the results dictate so? One of my biggest frustrations with the Lincoln Riley era is that at Oklahoma he was more than willing to spam the running game if he could, and that seems to have disappeared the last two seasons. I think (hope) he might not have any choice this year - in part because Waymond Jordan might be too good to ignore, but in part because it's unlikely that Maivava can actually lead a pro-style passing attack. He just hasn't shown the touch and accuracy on intermediate throws (which is unfortunate given how talented the tight end room is).

I think the best-case (as in, literally every single thing goes right) scenario is that that they can combine the 2019 Jalen Hurts Oklahoma offense with the 2023 UCLA defense. If Lincoln Riley can get back to that style of playcalling - lean on the power-option run game to set up play action shots - this can work. If he keeps trying to call games like a classic air raid coach, then this is going to be a long season.

I think USC goes 9-3, by virtue of Lincoln Riley rediscovering his roots, the defense benefiting from more talent and another year under this elite staff, and better luck in close games.

Tweet

On Wicked

I saw this movie a little over 6 months ago on a date night with my wife and I was truly blown away by how much I liked it. I went in expecting to enjoy the visuals and the music, but I definitely did not expect to find it as thematically engaging as it was. I wanted to write a review immediately after I finished watching it but I never got around to it. Until now. 

I was expecting a fun time. I have loved the Wizard of Oz universe since childhood. I knew that this movie would be worth watching for the visual effects, costume design, and musical numbers. I didn't know anything about the plot at all (other than that it was a prequel). I was expecting a lighthearted and fluffy movie - not an allegory on demagoguery, filled with some really pointed historical allusions. The basic premise is that Elphaba is born as a green witch. Like another famous green outcast, Elphaba is possesses tantalizing powers but excruciatingly little control over them, leading her to be seen as a menace. From birth must she navigate constant ostracization (including from her own parents). She goes to college, where she is identified as a prodigy and begins apprenticing in witchcraft - for her, an opportunity to finally harness her curse into a blessing. Eventually she gets tapped to meet the famed Oz - only to learn that he is a mere charlatan who wants to co-opt her powers towards his totalitarian desires. In particular, Oz is commandeering a clandestine operation to strip animals of their ability to speak, thus relegating them to second-class citizens.

A lot of the imagery in this movie invites natural comparisons to The Holocaust. When Oz talks about uniting the population by identifying a common enemy (in this case, the animals), he might as well be reading straight from Adolf Hitler's rhetorical playbook. Recall that one of Hitler's and Goebbels's most common propaganda tactics was to denounce Jews as Vermin; they knew that animal imagery would help to (literally) dehumanize them, thus decreasing the public's intolerance for caging and slaughtering them. It's no coincidence that the most prominent victim is a (scape)goat. The graffiti that shows up on Dr. Dilllamond's projector looks like the kind of message you might have seen spray-painted on many a Jewish business in 1930's Berlin. Oz's spell that makes the monkeys sprout wings through an excruciating generation process mirrors Josef Mengele's horrific experiments. However, for me personally this narrative felt just as closely tied to the story of America's indigenous population. While the cages that the baby animals were put in could easily symbolize the ghettos and/or the concentration camps, I think the element of linguistic extermination made me connect it to the Native Americans being shoehorned into reservations. The nightly strategy meetings could be analogized to Tecumseh's confederacy. But I have an even deeper, more personal reason why I latched onto this less obvious historical allegory. For those of you who don't know, my PhD research studies how different biological systems take decentralized approaches to overcoming obstacles and carrying out the tasks necessary for survival. By understanding how these systems have evolved to operate, I hope to reverse-engineer distributed computing algorithms that can reproduce even a fraction of Mother Nature's efficiency and elegance. One of the highlights of graduate school was the chance to go to Mexico for field work and observe tree-dwelling ants deftly navigate the tortuous jungle vines without the help of a smartphone or even a paper map. I was humbled by how nimble and adaptable the real ants were compared to my rigid simulation algorithms. If there's one thing my research has taught me, it is that humans may have knowledge, but animals have wisdom. When I see a movie about human characters subjugating rather than mutualistically co-existing with animals, I can't help but think about the struggle between the Native Americans and the European settlers, specifically because both conflicts embodied the knowledge/wisdom duality. When the Europeans settled in the Americas, they brought with them a wealth of scientific knowledge. While Native American tribes didn't possess the same advanced agricultural technology, what they did have was superior wisdom on land use - not just from an ecological perspective, but also an economic (specifically, a Georgist) perspective. A better world would have resulted from integrating these two complementary strengths - but instead the former was tragically harnessed towards forcibly conquering the latter.

Whichever metaphor you prefer, I think the movie wants to depict how demagoguery and mob mentalities lead to destructive outcomes for the most arbitrary and senseless reasons. Circling back to the Holocaust metaphor, Galinda's arc made me think about Schindler's List. That movie, and specifically the contrast between Oskar Schindler and Amon Goth, spoke to me about the difference between sins of omission vs. sins of commission. Genocidal movements depend on wicked individuals actively choosing to perpetrate evil; but they also depend on onlookers passively choosing to do nothing in the face of evil. They're two isotopes of the oxygen that feed the same flame. Like Shchindler, Galinda is amoral and transactional, eventually siding with Oz over Elphaba not because it is right but because it is easy and comfortable. For every one Oz there are hundreds of Galindas who could, collectively, stem the tide of demagoguery and prejudice but choose not to out of pure convenience (and lie to themselves about their degree of complicity).

Looking forward to part 2! A couple of stray thoughts to close:

• This movie is a great depiction of the well-established contact hypothesis from social psychology. Elphaba spent much of her childhood being cared for and supported by animals. This type of direct, deeply personal exposure helped her develop immunity to the anti-animal propaganda that so many others in Oz fell for.
• Pretty much the only thing I knew about Wicked was that it was the subject of an infamous South Park episode. After we saw the movie my wife told me that she knew several people who had trekked to the theaters multiple times during the opening week. The next day I insisted that we watch Broadway Bro Down. Here's the best part: in the opening scene, Randy's co-worker reveals that he didn't watch the Broncos game because he was watching Wicked with his wife. My wife and I were watching Wicked while the rest of Austin was watching Texas try to beat Georgia in the SEC Championship Game (though we did manage to catch the overtime period).

Tweet

On the 2024 Oscars

 

The Pics 

Barbenheimer

• In my (cinephilic) opinion, Barbenheimer was the best thing to happen to the movie industry in years - and also the most misunderstood. It was such a joyful throwback to the days when summer blockbusters were a unifying cultural experience in a tangible, corporeal way. This wasn't just an internet phenomenon - Barbenheimer plans came up in pretty much every July and August conversations that my wife and I had when we went out with friends. On the day we watched the movies, we spent the day in downtown Austin, and everywhere we went out to eat, we overheard Barbenheimer conversations at most of the other tables. And of course, that's to say nothing of the actual experience of seeing the sea of pink in the theaters. It was the kind of communal experience that a been a casualty of the technological advances in the entertainment industry. 
• When it was first announced that Barbie and Oppenheimer would be released on the same day, I made plans with my wife to go to the movies that Friday and flip a coin to see which movie we got to see. Later, I thought I was streets ahead when I thought to just plan a whole day out of seeing both movies. My bubble burst when I went to an Oscars party last year, and one of the other guests mentioned his double-feature plan unprompted. That's when I knew this was going to be a touchstone moment in pop culture.
• So, how exactly did Barbie + Oppenheimer become Barbenheimer? A lot of the focus was on the juxtaposition between the visual style and tone of the two films. I saw suggestions should schedule more "his and hers" paired releases. This would be a mistake - the best part about Barbenheimer was the fact that it was organic, and any attempt to try to reverse engineer that energy is destined to end in disappointment.. Some people attributed it to Barbie's unprecedented marketing campaign, but to me that felt more reactive than proactive; it seemed like the studio started pouring money into marketing only after they realized what they had brewing. Here's the real lesson that the industry should (but won't) take away from Barbenheimer: audiences don't want a parade of IP Zombies and labyrinthine franchises. We want challenging, thought-provoking films from visionary directors who are given carte blanche to bring their passion projects to life. The fact that we were getting not one, but two such films in the same year day felt unthinkable a year ago; hopefully it's not a blip.
• The reason why I have always admired and cherished Christopher Nolan is that he manages to produce movies that are equal parts entertaining and intellectual, and he makes them from within the major studio system. He hoodwinks executives into greenlighting smart movies, like a sort of Trojan horse. It felt like Greta Gerwig was doing the same thing when she snagged the job of directing Barbie, and she pretty much confirmed as much in her Rolling Stone interview. Barbenheimer weekend felt like a passing of the torch. 

Tweet

On the 2023 Oscars

The Pics 

Elvis

• I cannot believe this movie was nominated for best picture. All year assumed all of the Oscar buzz about this movie was just click-bait. Whoops.
• The framing of the movie - recounting Elvis's life from the perspective of his craven manager - didn't work for me. In theory, I think telling the story from the perspective of supporting characters can be interesting. When the movie started, it immediately reminded me of Citizen Kane, a movie that I cherish. For me, the genius of Citizen Kane is the way each new narrator peels away another layer from the mystique of the titular enigma. Unfortunately, this device is misguided for a movie which tells Elvis's story in a very linear manner and mechanical manner. Colonel Parker perspective never made me view Elvis or his story differently, and the movie never succeeds in making him a compelling character in his own right.
• I thought the debut of Elvis's (in)famous hip gyrations was depicted quite well. In particular, I think Baz Luhrmann deserves a lot of credit for directing all the actresses in the scene. None of the teenage girls in the audience came to that concert planning to release budding sexual tension; instead, Elvis (unwittingly) summoned the holy spirit, serving as an outlet for feelings that they never knew they possessed. The shrieking felt truly involuntary.
• To its credit movie acknowledges how much Elvis borrowed and profited from the Black gospel music. But the movie asserts that the Black community viewed this relationship completely uncritically, and if anything was honored to have a white man bring their music to the mainstream. Perhaps this is true, but it feels dubious. 
• I appreciate that Austin Butler manages to go beyond doing an impression of Elvis - he really captured the physicality of the legend. Unfortunately, I don't think this script gives him much chance to capture Elvis's interior.
• This is the absolute worst performance of Tom Hanks's career. His speech pattern is way too goofy for a supposedly sinister villain, and his accent changes in every scene.

Tweet

On the 2022 Oscars

For the second straight year I barely watched any movies. I only went into theaters three: once in the Summer when I thought the pandemic was winding down (LOL), and once for what I (correctly) suspected would be the crown jewel of the cinematic calendar, and once to see Spiderman in IMAX. So for the second straight year, my opinions are strong, but quite limited.

The Pics

Don't Look Up

• I thought this movie did exactly what it wanted and needed to do - it made me laugh out loud because the plot was both completely outlandish and infuriatingly believable. The best way I can describe it is a poor man's Dr. Strangelove.
• I can't say I am surprised by the negative critical reviews. Don't Look Up unapologetically indicts the neoliberal worldview shared by (what seems like) the vast majority of film critics. 

Tweet

On the 2021 Oscars

Because of the pandemic, I barely watched any (new) movies this year, and I do not remember the last time I was less invested in the ceremony. Hopefully we can go back to the cinemas in 2022. Please go get vaccinated.

The Pics

Palm Springs: The only movie that I truly loved in 2020. The idea of a shared time loop feels like the start of a new era for the entire genre. I would give it all of the awards if I could. I wrote more about it here.

Tweet

On Quarantine and Chill

When life gives you quarantine, make chill. At least, that's been the motto for much of the world for the last however many months it's been. As bad as the epidemic has been for the world, the silver lining (and to be clear, it's a very small silver lining) has been the chance to catch up on and expand my pop culture literacy. Here are my thoughts on what I've been watching during the quarantine, in no particular order.

Tweet

On my 2019 College Football Bar Crawl

Last year, I wrote about my experience visiting different college football bars in San Diego throughout the fall. TLDR: In 2018, I was inspired by the Athlon Sports Cover 2 podcast's annual college football in which they map out their dream road trip: pick one game to see every week, under the constraint that you can't see the same game twice. That fall I decided to visit a local watch party for a different college football team every week, and I had so much fun with the project that I decided to do it again the following year. Here's how it went down in 2019.

Tweet

On the 2020 Oscars

Last year, for the first time in years, I didn't get around to watching all of the Oscar nominees - but I still got all but one of them. This year, due to a combination of being crazy busy, general apathy, and the inexplicable decision to push the ceremony to the second weekend of February, I didn't even get close to seeing all the movies! I never mustered up much energy to see Ford v Ferrari, Joker, or Jojo Rabbit, and I didn't see Parasite until two days before the ceremony. Similar deal for all of the other awards. In other words, take my entire ballot with a grain of salt.

Tweet

On the 2010s movies and TV shows

On the 2010s in movies
Every February I rank the movies that defined the past calendar year. With the decade coming to a close, it felt natural to do the same exercise for the entire 2010s - and to throw in the defining TV shows for good measure. I don't have the energy to do more than write a long list, but I've linked to everything I've written in the past. But before that, some FAQs:

Tweet

On my season-long college football bar crawl

One undeniable part of the appeal of sports (to me, at least) is the communal aspect. When the game goes well, it's fun to feed off the energy of others, and when things don't go well there's comfort in numbers and solidarity. No matter how convenient the living room may be, I will never trade it for the roar of a stadium, or even a sports bar, gone wild. I believe this to be exponentially more true with college sports. I think most would agree that college stadiums/arenas are much more raucous than professional ones  - the best professional sports venues are usually described as a "college-like atmosphere". I've always theorized that college sports fandom tend to be more passionate than pro sports fandom, because your college team is the one you chose, as opposed to the one your parents did. Moreover, college is so often such a formative and memorable time of your life that it's easy to see why people retain such a strong emotional bond to their college team. However, I believe that college football fandom reaches an even higher level, because the unique form of sectional pride that gets attached to college football teams. I could go on for hours about the geopolitics of college football, but for your sake, I'll refrain.

Tweet

On the 2019 Oscars

I didn't watch many movies this year, due in part to lack of time and energy. Ok it was mostly due to being lazy. That said, here are my thoughts!

The Pics

Game Night

• This movie is about Max (Jason Bateman) learning that winning isn't about what you accomplish - it's about the people with whom you accomplish it. That's how he goes from being almost voluntarily infertile to putting a bun in Annie's (Rachel McAdams's) oven.
• This may be heresy, but I think the opening sequence from Game Night is close to the same level as the one from Up. Both concisely tell the story of a life lived to the fullest between soulmates. Also, Game Night is the best movie of the year to feature Don't Stop Me Now.
• A lesser movie would have made its female lead into a killjoy waiting for her man-child to grow up, all while making you wonder why she was ever into him in the first place. I love that this movie gives Annie a rich personality. She's just as competitive as Max, and she actually complements him rather than just putting up with him - McAdams has a lot of the best lines and gags in the movie. She wants to have a baby but it's not her defining character trait - if Max doesn't want it that's fine, not hard feelings, but she just won't wait around for him.
• The subplots involving the side characters were really well written - you could describe those subplots without even mentioning Max and Annie and it would still be entertaining.

Tweet

On the 2018 College Football Semifinal Results

On Notre Dame vs. Clemson

• Not that it matters, but I still stand fully behind what I said previously about Notre Dame's defense. When healthy, I think the Irish have elite players in their starting eleven. Early in the game I don't think Notre Dame was overwhelmed physically - they were holding up in man coverage and getting pressure on Trevor Lawrence. Once Julian Love and Julian Okwara (two of their three best players) got injured, the dam broke. The point here is not to make excuses for Notre Dame - I had picked Clemson to win assuming perfect health for both teams. Clemson was clearly the better team, and they had no trouble overcoming the loss of starter Dexter Lawrence. Notre Dame should have played softer coverage when they knew they were down their top corner and pass rusher. My point is, this game didn't tell me that the Irish are total frauds. It told me that they have the high-end talent you expect from a playoff team, but they still lack playoff-caliber depth. I get that it's easier and more fun to throw nuance out the window, but if that's what you're looking for then feel free to read another blog.

Tweet

On the 2018-19 College Football Postseason

On Clemson vs. Notre Dame

• The prevailing consensus for this game seems to be that Notre Dame will be lucky if the game is still winnable at halftime. I understand the skepticism of Notre Dame. I am not as high on them as I was at the midseason - since that time, they have had to eke out close wins against Pitt and USC, and their big wins over Stanford, Virginia Tech, and Michigan look significantly less impressive. Their schedule looked daunting in the preseason, but it ended up being a really bad schedule when Stanford, VaTech, Florida State, and USC all collapsed in the same season. It is fair to say they they haven't been tested against a great or even very good opponent since week 1. And I think to some extent, Alabama's beatdown of Notre Dame in the 2013 Orange Bowl still colors the way many perceive the program. But I caution viewers against underrating this iteration of the Irish. First of all, Notre Dame mostly dominated their schedule - since Ian Book became the starter, they haven't had a single game with a post-game win expectancy below 95%. Second, this team has recruited at a higher overall level than they had in 2012, and they have high draft picks at all levels of the defense (by contrast, I don't think anyone from the 2012 team's secondary was drafted higher than round 6). Since that Alabama game, Notre Dame has beaten LSU twice, and gone blow for blow with three playoff teams (2014 Florida State, 2015 Clemson, and 2017 Georgia). Third, this is a very balanced team that can beat you in many different ways. Their offense isn't elite in any one area, which is why they don't always look like world beaters against mediocre teams. However, with Book under center, it's extremely difficult to stop them completely, and I think their offense will scale better than the spread-to-run offense they were running with Brandon Wimbush.
• The main reason why I am simply not convinced that game will be a blowout is that I think people are overrating just how good this Clemson team really is. Don't get me wrong, Clemson is elite. They have the best freshman quarterback since Peyton Manning, along with usual stars at wide receiver and defensive line. Travis Etienne may well be the best running back in the country. Their rushing defense is historically good. However, I have major concerns about their passing defense. Their statistics look pretty good because the ACC was pitiful this year - in most games, Clemson's defensive line was able to overwhelm the past protection so badly that the opposing quarterback didn't stand a chance. I also think their games against two triple option teams (Georgia Southern and Georgia Tech) because those teams are disproportionately dependent on being efficient in the run game to be competent in the passing game, and Clemson is hard-wired to shut down power running games. However, their two toughest opponents, Texas A&M and South Carolina, were able to keep their quarterbacks upright and pick apart Clemson's shaky secondary. Had Clemson played a tougher schedule I question whether this game would be viewed as a warm-up for the national championship.

Tweet

On USC's Head Coaching Job

Update (11/25/2018): USC has decided to keep Clay Helton despite getting booed out of his home stadium after a loss to Notre Dame. Consider this post my rebuttal to Lynn Swann's explanation for his decision, as well as my thoughts on how USC should proceed if they move on from Helton in the future.

Going into USC's final two games, I predicted that they would sneak past UCLA, and that would be enough to ensure that Clay Helton would remain the head coach going into next season. Instead, USC came out flat in the second half and blew a lead against a (then) 2-8 UCLA team that was tied for last place in the conference, allowing the Bruins offense to march up and down the field while only putting up a meager 3 points of their own. Now assuming USC loses to Notre Dame (currently the point spread is Notre Dame -10.5), they will not even finish the season bowl eligible. That is simply unacceptable for a team with USC's talent. Normally, a coach can buy himself another season by firing a key member or two from his coaching staff, however Helton already played that card when he fired his offensive line coach and took over play calling responsibilities from his offensive coordinator. All of this has me feeling confident that athletic director Lynn Swann will fire Helton.

I take no joy in making this prediction. He's a man with a family, and by all accounts he is a good person. Contrary to what many USC fans might claim, Helton is a competent coach who brought some much needed stability to the program. He has recruited at a level close to Alabama and Ohio State. I actually think Helton's defenses have been pretty good - the statistics don't bear that out, but I thought there were a lot of times when their defense held stout despite being put in bad positions by the offense. You simply don't win a Rose Bowl and a Pac-12 championship by dumb luck. However, a program like USC should aspire to championships, not competency, and all the evidence suggests that Clay Helton is not a championship caliber coach. If you go by S&P+, USC has gone from finishing 9th to 26th to 41st (you see a similar trend with F+, AP ranking, coaches poll ranking, etc.). Helton is 20-4 with Sam Darnold, and 10-10 without him (I will admit I have been critical of Darnold in this space, and in retrospect I probably was too harsh on him). Obviously any coach will be better with a first round pick at quarterback (although a lot of coaches would kill for Cody Kessler and J.T. Daniels), but USC has such a big recruiting advantage over its conference that it should not be that dependent on the quarterback position for success.

To me, the data tells the following story: Helton inherited a roster that was loaded at key positions, but underachieved due to poor in-game coaching and a generally loose program culture. Helton brought stability and allowed the players to thrive (although they could have thrived more if Helton had started Darnold over Max Browne). However over time Helton's players started cycling into the program, and Helton's inability to develop players (especially offensive linemen) became a bigger and bigger problem. It is possible that Helton could become a great coach one day, but it's hard to see that happening at USC. To me, he was essentially given the keys to a Ferrari before he had even driven a Honda Accord. Perhaps you could argue that Helton deserves a chance to reverse the trend. I would argue that it is better to fire him now because it would be disastrous if he can't turn it around. It is always better to move on from a coach a year early rather than a year late, and that is especially true when you consider that USC is scheduled to play Alabama to open the 2020 season.

Assuming USC fires Helton and begins a coaching search, there are going to be people who, in an effort to to sound smart, claim that USC is actually not as great of a job as it looks. This is complete nonsense. USC boasts a combination of decorated football history and access to local talent that rivals any program in the country. They have won national championships across several decades, and churned out NFL draft picks with regularity. There is no reason to think USC is anything less than a top five job. I however, think USC actually has a strong case as the program where it is easiest to win a national championship, for two reasons. First, while geography is the primary factor that drives recruiting, it should be easier to convince a kid from the Midwest or the South to come to Tinseltown than the other way around. Second, when operating at peak efficiency, USC can recruit just as well as Alabama, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Michigan, Florida, Florida State, Clemson, Georgia, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. The difference is, those teams have to compete against each other, whereas none of USC's regional competitors have historically recruited at that level. The west coast has enough blue chippers to support one elite program, and USC essentially has a monopoly on those players.

The aforementioned contrarians will point to the fact that USC has had title droughts in the 80's, 90's, and 2010's as proof that USC is not an elite program. I don't buy this argument. There were times in the past 20 years when you could have made the same argument about Alabama, Notre Dame, Michigan, and Florida State - does anybody doubt the championship DNA of those programs right now? There are certainly examples of programs, such as Nebraska, that truly do lose the ability to compete for championships, but I do not believe that applies to USC. They have had extended success in this millennium under Pete Carroll, they still are surrounded by plenty of blue-chip talent, and they never depended on some of the fleeting advantages (TV coverage, academic loopholes, and ahead-of-its time strength and conditioning programs) on which Nebraska did. USC's recent decline can be attributed in part to crippling NCAA sanctions, and in larger part to poor coaching hires. This is not a case of 20/20 hindsight - if USC had hired multiple well-regarded coaches who tanked once they got to USC, I would be more open to the idea that USC may be a worse job than it appears. However, Lane Kiffin, Steve Sarkisian, and Clay Helton were all universally criticized at the time the moves were made. Kiffin had consistently failed upwards while proving nothing as the coach of the Raiders and the Volunteers; Sarkisian was nicknamed "Seven Win Sark" during his tenure at Washington; Helton was promoted from the interim position despite going 5-4 as the interim coach and having never been considered an elite coordinator. The first two hires were naked attempts to reverse engineer the Pete Carroll, and the Helton hire was made mostly on the basis of ending USC's losing streak to UCLA. In each case, you simply cannot argue that USC hired the best coach available and still couldn't win.

I am not a USC fan (though I am not not a USC fan, but that's a story for another time), but as a college football fan I want the Trojans to be good. I think the sport is better when the national championship race is truly national, and I believe USC is the only program West of the Rockies that can compete with teams like Alabama, Ohio State, and Texas when those programs are firing on all cylinders. Teams like Washington, Oregon, and Stanford simply have never recruited at that level, and while theoretically UCLA may have the ability to become an elite program, empirical evidence says otherwise. Thus, I want to see USC hire the best possible coach. These are my thoughts on how I would approach the search.

Tweet

On the first half of the 2018 College Football Season

A few thoughts at the midpoint...

• Before the season I took a cautious approach to projecting how well Alabama's new pieces would perform. Right now it appears that both Tua Tagovailoa and their rebuilt secondary have exceeded even the most optimistic expectations. I actually don't even think their front seven has been up to the team's usual standards, but it hasn't even mattered because Alabama finally has a once in a generation quarterback to go with is embarrassment of riches at offensive line and wide receiver. It's possible that a team with elite defensive safeties or an elite pass rush can bait Tua into making reckless throws - but the fact that he played so well against Georgia leads me to believe that his production is more than a product of the defense he's faced. It's a long season, but it's hard to imagine how Alabama could have looked any more dominant through six weeks.

Tweet

On week 2 of the 2018 College Football season

Some thoughts from around the country...

• My biggest takeaway from Texas A&M's near loss to Clemson is that Jimbo Fisher might just have his quarterback in Kellen Mond. I was never a big fan of Mond last year, and it's possible he simply picked the right time to play the best game of his career, but I was really impressed by his pocket presence and his accuracy when throwing on the run.
• I thought Clemson's secondary could have performed better, but they will improve throughout the year and in most cases their defensive line will protect them. My bigger concern coming out of this game is that their offensive line simply couldn't handle Texas A&M's front seven. I thought this would be Trevor Lawrence's breakout game, but instead they leaned on Kelly Bryant's legs to ease the burden on their line. It's fortunate that Clemson develops wideouts so well, because those guys are the ones who carried the team. I think Clemson's best shot at the national title involves letting Lawrence get his reps now so that he's ready for the playoffs; but if their offensive line doesn't play better then I worry about how they will fare against the other elite teams.
• I'm not surprised USC lost - I thought they would struggle to start the year. But to not even score a touchdown is pitiful. I actually thought their power running game looked alright, however they couldn't generate any explosive plays in the passing game. Their offensive line doesn't appear to be any better in pass protection that it was last year; Sam Darnold struggled mightily to overcome their protection issues, and it's not fair to ask a true freshman (even one as gifted as JT Daniels) to do the same. I still think USC is the favorite to win the south division because of their talent advantage, but to not be able to even score a touchdown is troubling.
• Stanford's opponents are stacking the box to stop Bryce Love at all costs. In both games David Shaw stubbornly tried to establish the running game until late in the second half, at which point the KJ Costello/JJ Arcega-Whiteside connection has proven to be a nightmare to defend. I think at some point Shaw's refusal to utilize his passing game early on will cost Stanford against an opponent with a better offense than USC's.
• Notre Dame didn't look very good against Ball State, but the fact that they called so many passes leads me to believe they were trying to practice their passing game against an opponent that they new they could beat in their sleep. You would've liked to see them hold up better in pass protection, and I think Brandon Wimbush still has a ways to go as a passer, but I think the Michigan game was more indicative of how they'll look against Vanderbilt.
• Coming into the year I thought Boise State was the best group of five team, but not a serious playoff contender. UConn isn't great, but the fact that Boise outgained them by 700(!) yards is eye-opening. They were up 41-0 at halftime, so this wasn't just a case of running up the score. To some extent that game was an outlier, but Boise sure looked like a team that can physically overwhelm the other teams in their conference. I think Brett Rypien should feast against Oklahoma State's defense, but if Boise can shut down that offense we have to consider their case for being ranked in the top 10.

Tweet

On Washington vs. Auburn

Some thoughts on the game...

• The glass half full version of this game goes as follows: Washington lost by 6 in a de facto road game against a top 10 team. At one point they had a lead in the fourth quarter, and had the ball with a chance to win at the end. And all of this happened despite Washington missing their starting left tackle and tight end. Washington's young receivers repeatedly made plays against an SEC secondary; their defensive line controlled the second half (until the final drive). Washington should come out of this loss feeling encouraged, right? If Washington's goal is to win the Pac 12 and make the Rose Bowl, then I agree with that assessment. However, if you came into the season expecting Washington to make and be competitive in the playoff (which I did), this game had some troubling signs. For one, Washington's offensive line looked completely overwhelmed. Their two running backs had decent numbers, but I thought that had more to do with Myles Gaskin and Salvon Ahmed finding ways to bounce it outside and make guys miss rather than the line consistently opening holes in the middle. Jake Browning was running for his life from the opening snap. I actually give Browning a lot of credit for craftily evading edge rushers when he could, and taking hit after hit after hit when he couldn't. But that's simply not a winning formula against elite teams, especially with a quarterback like Browning who depends so much on rhythm and timing rather than improvisation. Their blocking woes may disappear as soon as Trey Adams returns - he is that good - but who knows how good he'll be coming off knee and back injuries? I also was pretty disappointed by how unprepared Washington's secondary looked at the start of the game. They eventually settled in, but they didn't smother Auburn's receivers the way I expected. It's fair to point out that Jarrett Stidham is a likely first round picky. However when it comes to competing against potential playoff teams, I thought Washington's secondary would need to be their trump card. They looked alright against Auburn, but not like the the kind of elite position group that can warp the flow of games even against teams like Alabama and Ohio State.

• If I were an Auburn fan, I would be pretty disappointed that Auburn needed to eke out a win in the fourth quarter. In the first half Auburn established a clear advantage over Washington's offensive line while Jarrett Stidham sliced up Washington's secondary. After the first quarter I thought we were headed towards a blowout. Instead, Auburn's corners couldn't cover a fade route to save their lives, and their offensive playcalling went into a shell. Auburn's offensive line didn't answer any of the questions they had coming into the season, failing to consistently open holes in the running game. I thought Washington was pretty fortunate that Auburn kept waiting until 3rd and long to throw the ball. If Auburn wants to win the SEC they have quite a bit to clean up.

Tweet

On the 2018 College Football Season

A few predictions...

On the SEC:

• I predicted Alabama would have some drop-off on defense last year; statistically they were fine, but they clearly struggled to reload at middle linebacker. By the end of the regular season they looked as vulnerable as they've ever looked during the Saban era. They ended up being fine in the playoffs, but I think there's cause for concern again this year. They lose 3 of the their top 5 linebackers, and its top 6(!) players in the secondary. Saban's scheme depends on having corners hold up in press coverage on the outside, safeties taking away RPOs, and middle linebackers cleaning up runs that get funneled to them. Even with how well Alabama recruits, they will be asking a lot of some really green players. Of course, if Tua Tagavailoa is truly as good as he appeared to be in the national championship game, then Alabama's offense will p be good enough to carry the team. The rest of their offense is loaded, and if Saban has found his first truly elite quarterback then this offense will be unfair. But then again I thought Saban would unleash Jalen Hurts last year, but it appears Saban didn't feel comfortable making his quarterback the focal point, and it's not sure thing that he'll open up the offense for Tua. Moreover, Tua's championship game performance may well be a mirage that only occurred because Georgia wasn't prepared for him - Garrett Gilbert serves as a cautionary tale. Overall, Alabama is always a safe bet, but perhaps not as much so as in previous years.

Tweet

On the 2018 Oscars

The Pics

3 Idiotas
Fist Fight

Baby Driver
This movie has an memorable soundtrack, and some of the best set pieces in recent memory. The car chases are exhilarating enough on their own,  but the fact that they are actually choreographed to music pushes them to another level - the car is always an extension of Baby's (Ansel Elgort) eyes and ears. I obviously enjoyed Wright's signature comedic quick cuts and splashy color palate. The ending ultimately dampened the film for me. Doc's (Kevin Spacey) heel turn from being completely ruthless to having a soft spot for young love was way to sudden. The idea that he would be totally ok with his entire operation crumbling and not bear any ill will to Baby, the one that brought it all down, contradicts everything the film has told us about him up to that point. Also, if Doc's past love really gave him so much empathy for what Baby and Debora (Lily James) had, then why did he threaten to hurt Debora in order to coerce Baby into continuing to drive? As much as the other elements of the movie worked, this was a glaring flaw.

Tweet