9@ TBD@ TBDTBDTBDTBD 8W–IowaL–MinnesotaL–NebraskaW–N’Western 3W–NebraskaL–MarylandL–IllinoisL–Michigan Here’s what a schedule would look like with these rules in place: 2Ohio St.@ Mich. St.N’western@ Penn St.Minnesota Indiana3-1Ohio State3-1 7L–Penn St.L–WisconsinL–IowaW–IllinoisW–Michigan WeekMichigan St.MinnesotaNebraskaNorthwesternOhio State Michigan4-0Penn State4-0 5L–PurdueL–Ohio St.W–MarylandL–IowaW–Penn St. I’m going to proceed — fairly quickly — through a simulation of this schedule, in order to show you how the power-pairings would work. If a matchup was actually played in real life during the 2016 Big Ten regular season, I abided by the original result — so Ohio State still beats Michigan, for instance.3This holds even if there’s a different home team than in the original matchup. Otherwise, I simulated the result using ESPN’s Football Power Index, accounting for home-field advantage. Based on FPI, for instance, Iowa would have an 87 percent chance of winning a home game against Maryland, a matchup that didn’t occur in the actual Big Ten schedule but which could occur under power-pairing.We’ll zoom ahead to Week 5, when we encounter our first flex-scheduling week. (To see the simulated results for every game, scroll down to the big table toward the end of this article.) Here’s how it works: We take the 14 Big Ten teams and split them into pools of seven home teams and seven away teams based on where they’d been assigned to play ahead of time. We then have to pair the teams so as to give each one exactly one opponent for the week. There are, in theory, 5,040 possible ways to do this. An algorithm sorts through each of the combinations to find the best possible set of pairings, using the following rules:It eliminates all combinations that involve a game that was already played or which was already scheduled to be played. This cuts down on the number of legal combinations quite a lot — to about 600 for Week 5, for example.From among the remaining combinations, the algorithm finds those cases where the win totals match up as well as possible.4More specifically, it identifies cases where the average number of wins separating the paired teams is the smallest. It’s best to pair three-win home team Indiana against a three-win team from the road pool, for instance. If you can’t do that, then pairing Indiana against a four-win team or a two-win team is the next-best option.If several combinations are tied after Steps 1 and 2, the algorithm picks the set of matchups that are least likely to occur in the future, based on how the teams are assigned to home and away games in subsequent flex weeks.5For instance, Nebraska and Northwestern are both scheduled to play on the road in Week 8 and both scheduled to play at home in Week 9, so if they aren’t matched up against each other in Week 5, the only other chance is Week 6. The algorithm will prioritize that matchup before others in which teams have several more opportunities to face each other.If several combinations are still tied for being the most optimal after Steps 1, 2 and 3, the algorithm picks one of them at random.Here’s what the algorithm came up with for Week 5, for example: TEAMRECORDTEAMRECORD 9TBD@ TBDTBDTBD@ TBD 6TBD@ TBD@ TBDTBDTBD 9@ TBD@ TBDTBD@ TBD 1MarylandPenn StateOhio St.@ Rutgers@ Nebraska 4@ MichiganIowaWisconsinMarylandPenn St. WeekPenn StatePurdueRutgersWisconsin Wisconsin2-2Michigan State0-4 Nebraska1-3Northwestern1-3 2L–Ohio St.W–Mich. St.L–N’WesternL–Penn St.W–Minnesota That worked out pretty nicely — 12 of the 14 teams were power-paired against an opponent with the same win total, generating a key early matchup between 4-0 Michigan and 4-0 Penn State. Still, the home pool was slightly stronger than the road pool and some team had to draw the short end of the stick. It turned out to be 0-4 Michigan State, which was matched up against 2-2 Wisconsin.From there, Michigan beat Penn State in that matchup of undefeateds to go to 5-0. Meanwhile, a couple of overachieving 3-1 teams encountered a dose of reality against stiffer competition, as Indiana lost to Ohio State and Maryland lost to Iowa. That’s one of the benefits of power-pairing teams: The pretenders who benefited from quirky wins are fairly quickly weeded out because they face a tougher schedule.Since hearing about a hypothetical college football season is about as exciting as someone else’s fantasy football team, we’ll work through the rest of the schedule quickly. Ohio State ruined its chances by losing to Iowa in Week 6 (in a matchup that didn’t occur in real life). After Week 8, Penn State and Michigan both wound up at 7-1, with Michigan in the driver’s seat for the conference championship by virtue of having defeated Penn State in Week 5. However, Michigan drew a tough matchup against Iowa in Week 9, which it lost, while Penn State (having already defeated most of the good teams in the conference) beat Illinois to win the conference title. Here are all the simulated games in one chart, in case you want to see the dirty detail: WeekPenn StatePurdueRutgersWisconsin 4L–IndianaW–IllinoisW–MinnesotaW–N’WesternW–Mich. St. Minnesota1-3Rutgers1-3 3@ Nebraska@ MarylandIllinoisMichigan 4@ Ohio St.Rutgers@ Purdue@ Nebraska 5@ TBDTBD@ TBDTBD 6TBDTBD@ TBD@ TBD Big Ten simulated schedule with power-paired matchups 8L–IllinoisW–PurdueW–RutgersL–WisconsinW–Maryland WeekMich. St.MinnesotaNebraskaNorthwesternOhio State HOME POOLROAD POOL 1L–MarylandL–Penn St.L–Ohio St.L–RutgersW–Nebraska A Big Ten schedule with predetermined and power-paired games 7@ N’westernPurdueNebraskaRutgers@ Ohio St. 4L–MichiganL–IowaL–WisconsinL–MarylandL–Penn St. 1W–MinnesotaL–IowaW–N’WesternL–Indiana 9L–NebraskaW–MarylandW–Mich. St.W–PurdueW–Wisconsin WeekIllinoisIndianaIowaMarylandMichigan 5@ TBDTBDTBD@ TBDTBD For me at least, that feels a lot cleaner than having a conference championship game. Thanks to power-pairing, the top four finishers — Penn State, Iowa, Ohio State and Michigan in our simulation — all played one another, so a championship game wouldn’t have left a lot more to prove or disprove.It’s true that we got slightly lucky in this simulation by having a lone champion (Penn State) instead of a tie. But the bounty of head-to-head games between the top teams under power pairing makes potential ties easier to break, because the best teams would play each other more often.I hear what you’re saying: Penn State beat Ohio State in the real-life Big Ten and the committee chose to ignore that, or at least to de-emphasize it. I certainly don’t mean to suggest that power-pairing would remove every controversy. But in the spirit of a team debate, I have a couple of rebuttals.First, power-pairing would create a higher number of meaningful games, making it more likely that disputes would be settled on the field. In our simulated season, Penn State played (and defeated) Wisconsin, Nebraska and Illinois, a decent group of opponents whom they didn’t play in the actual regular season,6Penn State played Wisconsin in the Big Ten championship game, but not in the regular season. but skipped games against mediocre Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers, whom they pointlessly faced in real life. That made Penn State’s schedule harder and made its one-loss conference record even more impressive. On the flip side, Ohio State’s schedule got tougher also,7Ohio State played Iowa and Illinois in our simulated season, sacrificing real-life games against Michigan State and Rutgers. but they couldn’t handle the heat, blowing a game against Iowa that they didn’t have to play in real life. This is the algorithm working as intended: It improves the résumés of the very best teams while also thinning out the crop with (at least theoretically) entertaining games against closely matched opponents.Second, power-pairing would make teams easier to compare, by eliminating divisions and the potential ambiguities created by conference championship games (such as if Florida had become the nominal conference champion despite having more losses because it beat Alabama in the SEC championship). The top teams would simply be those that won the most games from the start of the regular season to the finish. And under power-pairing, the top teams would usually play one another, further aiding comparison.And third, eliminating conference championship games would free up a week in the schedule, so we could tack on another round to the College Football Playoff without further bloating the college football schedule. That would make it easier for strong conferences such as the Big Ten to place two or three teams into the playoff when deserving.It isn’t a perfect system, and it’s easy enough to imagine what some of the complaints would sound like. A team’s partisans would curse “the computer” every time the algorithm came up with an opponent they didn’t like. Coordinating travel logistics would become mildly more annoying. But power-pairing would get the best teams in the conference to play one another more often and create more deserving conference champions. It might be a nerdy solution, but it would make for better football. 6L–NebraskaW–MarylandW–Ohio St.L–IndianaW–Purdue Purdue1-3Illinois1-3 3@ RutgersMinnesota@ Mich. St.Purdue@ Wisconsin 9W–IllinoisL–N’WesternL–IndianaL–Ohio St. 1L–MichiganW–WisconsinW–PurdueW–Mich. St.W–Illinois 2Indiana@ Michigan@ Purdue@ Iowa@ Illinois 8TBD@ TBDTBDTBD WeekIllinoisIndianaIowaMarylandMichigan 7@ Penn St.@ Wisconsin@ IowaIllinoisMichigan 7Mich. St.@ Indiana@ MarylandMinnesota 8@ TBD@ TBD@ TBDTBDTBD 8TBDTBD@ TBD@ TBD@ TBD 9L–Penn St.W–RutgersW–MichiganL–MinnesotaL–Iowa 6TBDTBD@ TBD@ TBD@ TBD 2MarylandNebraskaWisconsin@ Rutgers Ohio State somewhat embarrassed the Big Ten in getting shut out by Clemson 31-0 in the College Football Playoff semifinal last week. Still, hindsight is 20/20, and I don’t necessarily begrudge the playoff selection committee for having turned down Penn State, which won the Big Ten championship, in favor of the Buckeyes. Ohio State was probably the better regular-season team and had fewer losses against a tougher schedule. Penn State — which for its part blew a big lead to lose the Rose Bowl to USC — had a head-to-head win against Ohio State and the conference title, two factors the committee explicitly says it considers in ranking the teams. It was a tough decision.My point is simply this: Conference championships, as currently devised, don’t make much sense. Because of imbalanced divisions, championship games often don’t pit the two best teams in a conference against each other (Big Ten championship participant Wisconsin was probably the fourth-best team in its league, for instance). They’ll sometimes result in an awkward rematch of a game that was already played during the regular season. And conference championship games waste a weekend that could be better spent on something else, such as expanding the College Football Playoff to six or eight teams.And now we have pretty good evidence that the playoff selection committee doesn’t really care one way or another. So let’s get rid of them! Imagine a world in which we’re spared the annual indignation of having to watch Florida lose to Alabama 59-2. Imagine a world in which historical rivals always play each other every year and yet, by almighty Rockne, the best teams in a conference always play one another, too. Imagine a world with no divisions. By which I mean: a world in which we eliminate divisions such as the ACC’s perplexingly named Atlantic and Coastal divisions, and all teams within the same college football conference compete as one.Not only have I imagined such a world, my friends, but I have seen one. I have seen it in the hallways of a high-school debate tournament.High-school debate tournaments — all of you will be shocked to learn that I was a master debater in high school — face some of the same constraints that college football conferences do. In any given tournament, there are lots of teams of radically varying quality levels, and there’s not nearly enough time to have them all play one another. A typical debate tournament, for example, might involve 60 teams but only six rounds of competition, with the best eight or 16 teams advancing to the playoffs (or what debaters call the “outrounds”). Each round is precious, and you don’t necessarily want to watch some some pimply-faced sophomores from a Class D school debating a Class A juggernaut like my alma mater, East Lansing High School, any more than you want to watch Rutgers lose to Michigan 78-0.The solution that debate tournaments devised is something called power-pairing. Power-pairing just means that teams with the same record are paired off against each other, so that a team that starts off the tournament 2-0 will face off against another 2-0 team, for instance. It usually works by drawing the first two rounds of a tournament at random,1Alternatively, the teams may be seeded somehow, such that everyone starts out with one matchup against an experienced team and another matchup against an inexperienced team in their first two rounds, for example. and after that, everything is power-paired.This turns out to be a surprisingly elegant solution. It helps to make the matchups relatively even, which not only helps students to learn more but also usually tells you more in determining the best teams. Furthermore, the pairings are somewhat self-correcting. Suppose a good team happens to randomly draw very tough opponents in its first two rounds and gets off to an 0-2 start. They’ll receive some compensation by being paired with easier opponents the rest of the way out — an 0-2 team and then a 1-2 team, and so forth. As another bonus to this system, the best teams are put through the gantlet and really earn their keep. A team that finishes its tournament undefeated or with just one loss will have beaten a lot of very good teams along the way.What would power-pairing look like in the context of a college football season? Here’s an example that I drew up involving this year’s Big Ten. I experimented with a few different setups, and happen to like this one, but feel free to disagree with the particulars (this is more a proof-of-concept than anything I’ve thought all that much about).It works like this: Each team plays nine conference games, the same number they play under the Big Ten’s current rules. Five of these are scheduled in advance, while four are power-paired or “flex” matchups determined only once the season is underway. To be more specific:Teams play rivalry games in weeks 2, 4 and 7. These matchups are the same every year. Week 7 features the most storied rivalries such as Michigan vs. Ohio State — the games that the Big Ten currently plays in the last week of the season. The games in weeks 2 and 4 involve secondary or tertiary rivals, such as Ohio State vs. Illinois or Michigan vs. Minnesota. Granted, this doesn’t always work out perfectly, since some teams (such as Michigan) have lots of Big Ten rivals and others (here’s looking at you, Maryland) don’t really have any. In real life, you might retain some of these games but have others chosen on a random or rotating basis.The matchups in weeks 1 and 3 are based on the previous season’s standings. Week 1 is a high-low pairing (the best teams from the previous season play the worst teams) while Week 3 is a high-high pairing (the best teams play the best teams and the worst teams play the worst teams). In theory, this gives each team one relatively tough and one relatively easy matchup within the first few weeks of the season.Weeks 5, 6, 8 and 9 are flex or power-paired matchups, where teams are paired against others with similar records that they haven’t played previously and that they aren’t already scheduled to play against in the future. (I’ll describe the procedure for pairing teams in a moment.) Each team has two home flex games and two away flex games, with the weeks designated in advance: For instance, Penn State has away games in weeks 5 and 9 and home flex games in weeks 6 and 8. Home and away weeks are set up such that every team has the opportunity to play every other team at least once.2For example, since Michigan State and Ohio State weren’t originally scheduled to play one another, there has to be at least one flex week where one of them is scheduled to be on the road and the other is scheduled to be at home. 3L–IowaW–IndianaL–Penn St.L–Ohio St.W–N’Western 4Indiana@ Illinois@ Minnesota@ N’westernMich. St. 5L–WisconsinW–RutgersW–N’WesternL–NebraskaW–Indiana 3W–RutgersL–MinnesotaW–Mich. St.W–PurdueW–Wisconsin 7W–Mich. St.L–IndianaL–MarylandW–Minnesota Iowa3-1Maryland3-1 7L–N’WesternW–PurdueW–NebraskaW–RutgersL–Ohio St. 4W–Ohio St.W–RutgersL–PurdueW–Nebraska 5@ TBDTBDTBD@ TBD@ TBD 1MichiganWisconsinPurdue@ Mich. St.@ Illinois 6W–RutgersW–N’WesternW–IllinoisL–MinnesotaL–Iowa 3Iowa@ IndianaPenn St.Ohio St.@ N’western 5L–MichiganW–IllinoisL–MinnesotaW–Mich. St. 6W–WisconsinL–MichiganL–Mich. St.L–Penn St. 2W–MarylandL–NebraskaL–WisconsinW–Rutgers 1@ Minnesota@ IowaN’western@ Indiana 8W–Mich. St.L–MichiganL–Penn St.L–Ohio St.W–Indiana Power-paired Week 5 matchups in hypothetical Big Ten schedule 2L–IndianaL–MichiganW–PurdueW–IowaW–Illinois
The semifinal games of the College Football Playoff are on Dec. 31. In the video above, FiveThirtyEight’s Neil Paine breaks down the two semifinal matchups. Share on Facebook
Something strange is happening with the baseball hot stove this winter. Not only is it not hot, it almost seems like it’s off.Available stars who would ordinarily have been snapped up long ago are still sitting on the shelf, which has the MLB Players Association panicking — and looking for answers. Is this simply a weak class of free agents? Have all 30 teams finally figured out that spending boatloads on veterans is usually dumb? Is the gap between contending and tanking teams to blame? Or is it just — gasp! — collusion, like the kind owners engaged in three decades ago?It’s difficult to pin down exactly why this offseason has proceeded so slowly. But the sluggish pace it has taken is quantifiable — and eye-catching. I gathered data on ESPN’s top 40 free agents1For all players ranked 40th or better on ESPN’s yearly free-agent rankings. In some years, the rankings skipped numbers, presumably because some players were ranked but did not actually hit free agency. This means that the top 40 doesn’t always include a full 40 players. for each winter going back to the 2006-07 offseason and tracked how many days it took after the end of World Series before those top players were signed. (Players technically become free agents the morning after the World Series ends.) For instance, today is Day 82 since the Astros beat the Dodgers in Game 7 of the Fall Classic, and only 43 percent of the top 40 free agents — including only two of the top 10 — have put pen to paper. How abnormal is that? Between 2006 and 2016, the average offseason saw 76 percent of the top 40 free agents inking deals by Day 82 of the offseason.Here’s what this offseason looks like so far compared to how long it usually takes for top free agents to sign: The freeze on this year’s class of free agents is alarming. For one thing, it took much longer than usual for a team to break the free-agent ice. And, aside from a brief acceleration during the winter meetings in mid-December, the pace of signings has been markedly slower than normal — particularly early in the offseason, when the biggest flurry of signings usually takes place.Only the 2008-09 offseason, when just 53 percent of top-40 players were signed by this stage of the winter, came close to lagging as much as the current slowdown. And even then, most of the biggest available names had already been signed by this point in the offseason. Granted, three of those (Mark Teixeira, CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett) were all picked up by spendthrift Yankees. By contrast, the current Yankees made their big splash in the trade market, where they acquired Giancarlo Stanton, and the team is now trying to squeak in under the luxury-tax threshold rather than adding free agents. Perhaps in the past, slow free-agent classes could always count on the Yankees to open the pocketbook and keep the money flowing — but not this year.Before we jump to any conclusions about the owners being in cahoots, it’s worth noting that many of the explanations for this year’s issues contain at least a kernel of truth. This class of free agents is indeed mediocre — in terms of wins above replacement2Using an average of the WAR metrics found at FanGraphs and Baseball-Reference. produced by top-40 players in their previous three seasons, this is the worst crop of available talent since at least 2006.3Looking only at the most recent previous season improves this group’s standing slightly, bringing it up to sixth out of the 12 free-agent classes I examined. At the top of ESPN’s free-agent rankings, ace starter Yu Darvish is as good as any prized free agent from yesteryear, but many of the names further down the list come with legitimate issues, including Jake Arrieta’s declining value, J.D. Martinez’s inconsistent defense and Alex Cobb’s durability.It’s also true that more teams are tanking now than in years past. And the proliferation of statheads in MLB front offices over the past decade could explain why teams are no longer scrambling to offer big free-agent contracts to players who are already past their primes.As Yahoo’s Jeff Passan wrote in an excellent column last week, that final point is part of a bigger issue with the fundamental way baseball’s economics works, particularly as younger players generate more and more of the game’s on-field value. But if teams are suddenly realizing the folly of free agency, it’s also worth asking why they’ve chosen to simultaneously make their stand this year. (Bad deals still got made last season, though perhaps not as many as in the past.) The alternative explanation — collusion — is notoriously difficult to prove, however, and seems like an unbelievable risk for a group of owners who are already making money hand over fist.But the simple truth is that we don’t really know why the market for free agents is so sluggish this year. We can only prove that it is indeed historically slow-moving — and that fact alone demands an explanation.
OSu freshman center Micah Potter grabs a rebound against Navy on Nov. 11, 2016. Credit: Alexa Mavrogianis | Photo EditorThe Ohio State men’s basketball team will look to get back on track this Saturday as they take on Fairleigh Dickinson at the Schottenstein Center.The Buckeyes are coming off a tough fought match in which they fell to No. 6 Virginia, losing by a final score of 63-61, in a game in which they once held a 16-point lead.“Obviously we were disappointed that we lost and in the way that we lost,” said sophomore guard C.J. Jackson. “I feel like we are encouraged as a team and we know how much better that game made us and how much closer we got. We connected more than we have ever since I been here and it was good to see.”The biggest issue OSU faced in the game was turnovers. The Scarlet and Gray turned the ball over 20 times compared to the Cavaliers 10. There was also a big discrepancy when it came to fouls, with the Buckeyes committing 20 to Virginia’s 11.“With the turnovers we had the other night, we have to play smarter,” said OSU coach Thad Matta. “I don’t want guys to not take risks but they have to be more calculated. When you have 20 turnovers and you shoot 50 percent, I am trying to explain to these guys that it is problematic.”OSU will hope to correct these issues as they take on Fairleigh Dickinson.The Knights enter the game with a 2-4 record. They are currently riding a two-game losing streak, coming up short against both Saint Peter’s and Army.Fairleigh Dickinson is led by guard Darian Anderson. The junior out of Washington, DC is averaging 19.7 points per game on 54 percent shooting. Anderson also leads his team in steals, averaging 1.7 a game.The Knights also receive valuable play from their big man, forward Mike Holloway. The 6-foot-7 sophomore is averaging 14.7 points per game and six boards.“We are going to see a team that is going to try and push the basketball,” Matta said. “We are going to see a ton of ball screens. We are going to see handoffs. They are going to change up defenses and press a little bit. It will be a good gauge to see how we take care of the basketball.”Despite the loss in their last time out, the Buckeyes did have some positives that they hope will give them something to build off of moving forward.“It just shows how good we really are right now and how much better we could become,” said freshman center Micah Potter. “We were down a starter, we had some silly mistakes and just didn’t execute our offense. If we can get it to where we can execute the entire game and play Ohio State basketball the entire game we will be really good. We can compete with anyone in the country.”
Time off has not been advantageous for Ohio State in the past. The Buckeyes have dropped three of their last four contests following a bye week, but coach Jim Tressel said he thinks the week off could pay dividends this time around when OSU hosts Penn State on Saturday. “I thought we used our time wisely,” Tressel said. “Hopefully we will be back on the field with a lot of enthusiasm and pep in our step. We did work out on Sunday for about an hour and guys seemed to be refreshed.” As the Buckeyes prepare for the home stretch of the season, Tressel said it’s also important to recover emotionally. “I think if there’s anything that you can accomplish during an open week, it’s perhaps to fill your emotional gas tank back up,” he said. “We’re going to need every ounce of emotion we can get as Penn State comes in.” Injury report Plagued by injury this season, the banged-up Buckeyes got the chance to rest and heal during their break. After suffering a foot injury in the team’s lone loss at Wisconsin, captain Ross Homan has been making strides toward full health, Tressel said. “The key will be how does he do two days in a row to see if there’s any issues,” Tressel said. “But based upon after Sunday, I would say no doubt” he’ll be ready. Tressel said he expects both Homan and fellow linebacker Dorian Bell to play Saturday. Revived running games A key to each squad’s success of late has been a resurgence from the running back position. For the Buckeyes, junior Dan “Boom” Herron eclipsed the 100-yard mark on the ground for the first time in his OSU career against Minnesota on Oct. 30. “I think ‘Boom’ has raised us through his play,” Tressel said. “I think his play has been excellent, and if he’ll play like he did this last month and like he did last November, we have a chance this November because I think he is a difference-maker.” The Nittany Lions’ leading running back, Evan Royster, has regained form from his First-Team All-Big Ten selection a year ago. Achieving 100-yard performances in each of the last two games, Royster is now PSU’s all-time leading rusher, with 3,652 yards. “Evan Royster is a guy that now has hit it into gear,” Tressel said. “I think at the beginning of the year, he probably wasn’t himself, and as the year has gone on, just like most tough backs do, he got himself back to where he’d like to be.” Featuring two of the conference’s elite rushers, dominance on the ground could be the key to victory on Saturday. “We’ve never been bashful about saying if you do well with the run game, you’ve got a chance to win,” Tressel said. Penn State quarterback duo The Nittany Lions will come to the Horseshoe with two quarterbacks who have thrown for at least 500 yards and five touchdowns: redshirt sophomore Matt McGloin and freshman Rob Bolden. Tressel said the Buckeyes expect to see both under center. “They’ve now played two quarterbacks, and I would expect that we may, perhaps, see both of them. That’s the way we would prepare,” he said. Despite having to prepare for two signal-callers, Tressel said the duo’s styles don’t differ much. Mr. November The Buckeyes are 26-4 under Tressel in November, including 14-1 since 2005. Tressel said his team knows the importance of improvement in the last month of the season. “I think they’ve done a pretty good job of believing you have to keep working to get better, and if you keep working to get better, you probably will,” he said. “Then it gives you a chance in November.” Tressel said his players understand the importance of the team’s final three games. “When I saw these schedules about four or five years ago when they said, ‘You’re going to have Penn State to start your November for a few years,’ I thought, ‘Oh,’” he said. “Not to mention you’re going to have Iowa and Michigan right after them, that’s going to put a challenge on any November record anyone would ever have. “I think our guys believe that this is a very important time.”
Ohio State redshirt sophomore quarterback Dwayne Haskins (7) fakes a handoff to sophomore running back J.K. Dobbins (2) in the first quarter of the Ohio State-Oregon State game on Sept. 1. Ohio State won 77-31. Credit: Casey Cascaldo | Photo EditorBefore his largest game as acting head coach for Ohio State, Ryan Day faced many questions on the preparation going into Saturday’s matchup against No. 15 TCU during the Big Ten coaches teleconference on Tuesday.Day said the Horned Frogs are a “veteran group whose played big games before,” while also saying that the neutral-site game is basically an away matchup for No. 4 Ohio State, considering AT&T Stadium is “right down the street” from his opponent.Day also complimented TCU’s deep and diverse defense group, which was ranked No. 16 in 2017 in points allowed.“It’s hard to find matchup problems when they have guys that can do multiple things,” Day said.A comparison was made to last season’s matchup against then-No. 5 Oklahoma that Ohio State lost to 31-16 in Week 2, hurting the Buckeyes’ chances at the College Football Playoff at the end of the season.Day said the game against TCU is entirely different, because “that was a different team last year and that was a long time ago.”“Last week if we lose to Rutgers, that could have been the reason too,” Day said. “We know that every time we go out and play we are on the line, and that’s no different this week”Progress in the quarterback roomAfter redshirt sophomore quarterback Dwayne Haskins threw for at least four touchdowns for the second straight game, Day said that he has done a great job at finding receivers in his two starts thus far.But, when talking about where Haskins has improved the most, Day said that it has been in two areas off the field: in the classroom and in the weight room.Though Haskins has proven himself as a threat through the air, Day said he expects that Haskins will continue to improve his run game as the season progresses.“He’s a big guy back there,” Day said. “I do think as the season goes on he will run more.”Day was also asked about redshirt freshman quarterback Tate Martell, who completed all 10 of his passes, both throwing and running for touchdowns of more than 40 yards.Day said that Martell “has improved significantly in the last couple of months,” and that the more he can improve the pass game, the more his running ability will open up opportunities.Praise for OkudahFollowing the 52-3 win over Rutgers, where the Buckeyes allowed only 11 completions on 30 attempts, and 65 yards through the air, Day had nothing but praise for sophomore cornerback Jeffrey Okudah.Okudah finished the game with two tackles, including one solo tackle, but Day said he is “one of the best kids you can be around,” and complemented his work ethic in practice.Day said that Okudah has really developed over the year, and that “he’s got a lot of great football ahead of him this year.”
The TV star died of a brain tumour in March aged 77, leaving his £1.5 million estate to his wife.However, his son said that because of a series of bad investments Paul owed £1 million in taxes when he passed away.Speaking to the Sun on Sunday, Paul Junior claimed that two months after his father’s death Ms McGee told him she was closing the Paul Daniels Magic Party Shop in Wigan where he was working. Paul Daniels and Debbie McGeeCredit:Paul Howard/REX/Shutterstock Ms McGee worked as the magician’s on-stage assistant between 1979 and 1994, and married Daniels in 1988. She lives in the couple’s £2.5 million Berkshire home, which was transferred into her name before her husband’s death.Paul Junior said: “I’ve put up with her for years for the sake of my dad but now that he’s gone I want nothing to do with her.”A spokesperson for Ms McGee described the claims as “inaccurate”. He said: “She had told me I could keep the shop going, because my dad had always enjoyed keeping it alive. We opened it together.”She told me she would look after me and help pay my rent and bills afterwards. But, like my inheritance, I’m yet to see a single penny.”I had no money to pay my rent.”He also claims that he was left without a phone after she cancelled his £38-a-month company contract, but said she agreed to give him a £3,500 redundancy pay out. He added: “She promised that she would look after me and my brothers. But the only person she has looked after is herself.”Paul Junior is the eldest of three children from Daniels’ first marriage to Jacqueline Skipworth, and spent ten years working with his father as an assistant stage manager in the 1970s and 1980s.However, in the mid 1990s he said that he and his father became estranged, only reconciling a few years later when he was convicted of cultivating marijuana worth £89,000 and given a 12-month community order.He said: “It became something that brought us closer together again. Rather than wash his hands of me, he brought me back into the fold. We became father and son again.” Want the best of The Telegraph direct to your email and WhatsApp? Sign up to our free twice-daily Front Page newsletter and new audio briefings. Paul Daniels’ son has accused his stepmother Debbie McGee of failing to support him after the magician’s death.Paul Junior, 56, says Ms McGee told him she would “look after him” and his two brothers after his father left his entire estate to her.But he claims that she cut off his phone contract and left him jobless after closing the magic and fancy dress shop in Wigan that he and his father had set up together.
Macdonald also revealed that Lou Reed, whose song Perfect Day was used in the soundtrack, never liked the film.The producer has also worked with Oscar-winner Boyle on the Trainspotting sequel, T2, which is due to be released in cinemas in January 2017.He said the film was very different to its original as the characters had moved on from drug taking, but said he thought fans would enjoy the sequel. T2 was shot on various locations across Scotland during the summer and is currently being edited ahead of its release.It is loosely based on writer Irvine Welsh’s 2002 follow-up novel Porno and the author will feature in a cameo role. Noel Gallagher missed out on featuring on the soundtrack for Trainspotting because he thought the film was about railway enthusiasts, it has emerged.Director Danny Boyle was said to be desperate for Gallagher and his band Oasis to do a song for the 1996 movie starring Ewan McGregor, Robert Carlyle and Ewen Bremner.The soundtrack of the film became a huge hit and featured fellow Britpop bands Blur and Pulp as well as US music stars Iggy Pop and Lou Reed.However, the singer-songwriter turned down the chance to feature in the film about Edinburgh heroin addicts as he did not want to be associated with a film he thought was about train spotters. The story was revealed during a question and answer session with Trainspotting producer Andrew Macdonald and costume designer Rachel Fleming at a 20th anniversary screening of the film.Macdonald said: “Danny is from near Manchester and he was very keen to have Noel Gallagher do something but there was a reason why he didn’t do it.”He came to the launch party in Cannes, but I don’t know why he didn’t do a piece of music.”Fleming then said: “I met Noel at a thing the other week and he said to me: ‘I would have done something, but honestly I thought it was about train spotters. I didn’t know.’ That’s what he actually said.” Macdonald said: “It’s 20 years later and they have all moved on, they are at different places in their lives and some of them may even have children.”I think because of the integrity of it and Danny insisting it was the same actors, people will be okay with it.”It is working out to be its own thing. But the characters aren’t 20-years-old anymore and you’re not going to become 20-years-old by watching it.” I would have done something, but honestly I thought it was about train spotters. I didn’t knowwhat Noel Gallagher told costume designer Rachel Fleming Want the best of The Telegraph direct to your email and WhatsApp? Sign up to our free twice-daily Front Page newsletter and new audio briefings.
Thousands of users of a parking app may have had their personal details shared with other customers.Around 2,000 customers of the parking app RingGo were presented with other people’s details when they logged into the service.Many took to Twitter to complain of seeing people’s names, vehicle registrations, email addresses and even credit card details.The app allows users to register several cars and pay to park them in hundreds of locations across the country.One customer, John Rust, tweeted: “Just got a call from a guy who logged into @RingGo_parking app and it loaded my personal info – he phoned my mobile number that was revealed.”Another, Thomas Bathurst, branding the incident “awful”, reported seeing credit card information and car details.The company confirmed the problem occurred after a new version of the app was released in on Tuesday and said a full investigation was being launched and a report had been submitted to the Information Commissioner’s Office.But on Thursday a glitch in the database meant some drivers were able to see details from other accounts during peak rush hour.A spokesman from RingGo yesterday confirmed the data breach.He said: “As soon as the issue came to our attention we ran a fix and by 0930 no additional motorists’ info could be viewed.”We believe the actual number of people who have been directly impacted is around 600.”This error is totally unacceptable and we apologise sincerely to those affected.”The spokesperson said a further 1400 accounts had potentially been affected because they were parking at the time the incident began. Want the best of The Telegraph direct to your email and WhatsApp? Sign up to our free twice-daily Front Page newsletter and new audio briefings. They added: “We can assure customers that no useable payment card information was displayed – only the last 4 digits are shown. Some personal data could have been visible, eg name, vehicle registration.”
“Since even small amounts of gluten can affect gluten-sensitive patients, this supplement can play an important role in addressing the residual gluten that is often the cause of uncomfortable symptoms.”Our results suggest that this enzyme can potentially reduce the side effects that occur when gluten-sensitive individuals accidentally eat a little gluten.”We are not suggesting that AN-PEP will give these individuals the ability to eat pizza or pasta, sources of large amounts of gluten, but it might make them feel better if they mistakenly ingest gluten.”She stressed that the enzyme was not tested on coeliac disease patients, who can be seriously harmed by even small amounts of gluten. Coeliac patients should not consume any gluten, even with the enzyme, Dr Konig warned. The findings were presented to experts attending the Digestive Disease Week 2017 meeting in Chicago.Dr Konig added: “This substance allows gluten-sensitive patients to feel safer, for example, when they are out with friends at a restaurant and can’t be sure whether something is 100% gluten-free. Shelves of gluten, dairy and nut free food on shelves in a Tesco storeCredit:Alamy Lead researcher Dr Julia Konig, from the University of Orebro in Sweden, said: “Since even small amounts of gluten can affect gluten-sensitive patients, this supplement can play an important role in addressing the residual gluten that is often the cause of uncomfortable symptoms.”Studies show that even when following a gluten-free diet, unintentional gluten intake can still occur, depending on how strict a gluten-free dieter is.”For the study, 18 gluten-sensitive volunteers were given a porridge made with two crumbled wheat biscuits containing gluten. Want the best of The Telegraph direct to your email and WhatsApp? Sign up to our free twice-daily Front Page newsletter and new audio briefings. Gluten intolerance can partly be overcome by swallowing an enzyme pill with food, research has shown.The simple measure can allow people sensitive to the wheat protein to consume small quantities of gluten without experiencing bloating, diarrhoea and abdominal pain.Scientists say the discovery could be a “game-changer” for gluten-intolerant individuals who have to be super-careful about what they eat. They also took high or low doses of the enzyme AN-PEP, or a “dummy” placebo pill. Both doses of the enzyme were found to break down gluten in the stomach and small intestine.Gluten levels in the stomach were 85 per cent lower in participants who swallowed the enzyme than in those given the placebo.Compared with the placebo, taking the enzyme lowered gluten levels by up to 87 per cent once food had reached the duodenum, the first part of the small intestine.