VanDelaySports.com > MAC Football > Analysis of the Alleged Toledo Point Shaving Fiasco

An In-Depth Analysis of the Alleged Toledo Point Shaving Fiasco

Over the past month, there have been several local, regional, and national sports publications who have written stories about the allegations of University of Toledo running back Scooter McDougle, and his alleged involvement with point shaving UT football games during the 2005 season. Three different regional writers contacted me for interviews and evidently none of them liked what I had to say because none of them have used any of my thoughts or insight within their articles. All three seemed to have their predetermined conclusions and were looking for canned quotes to prove their point of view within their published articles.

This article doesn’t do that – in fact, I’ve taken the pain-staking process of reviewing all three games in detail to see if there is any way, shape or form, that a player could influence the spread or outcome of these games. Considering that Scooter McDoogle has participated in only a few plays over the past two seasons due to injuries, this process of in-depth game reviews seems to be the only logical choice to see if in fact he could have influenced the spread or outcomes.

I have watched the game tapes from 2005 UT/Fresno State games & 2005 GMAC Bowl along with dissecting their play by play drive charts for each game. I went over each play for the 2005 UT/Temple contest to see if, or even how, a player could or could not influence an outcome of one of these contests.

Unlike any published article to date, I did not contact any current or former bookie or any down and out Vegas gambler. I’ve used cold hard facts for this analysis which are highlighted below, in game-by-game detail.

Toledo Football Game Overviews

Toledo at Temple; September 17, 2005

The Game
Toledo entered the game averaging 59 points per game with blowout wins over Western Illinois and Western Michigan. Temple entered the game 0-2 which included a 65-0 shellacking at Wisconsin the week prior. Temple was making their home debut while Toledo was playing their first road game. Toledo was looking for their first non-conference road win since 2001, when ironically they beat Temple 33-7 in Philadelphia. Toledo opened the game with a 28-0 lead early in the second quarter before cruising to a 42-17 victory. Bruce Gradkowski finished 20-29 for 182 yards and 4 TDs. With their huge first quarter output, Toledo had now outscored opponents 48-0 in the first quarter and 104-13 in the first half during the first three games of the 2005 campaign. Of note, DB Keon Jackson's 66-yard touchdown off an interception in the first quarter was the fourth TD off an interception during his career. In addition to Jackson's TD, the Rocket defense set up another first-half score on a 41-yard return to the Temple 31-yard line on a fumble recovery by LB David Thomas. Ten Rockets caught at least one pass for the second week in a row.

Analysis
This game was statistically much closer than the final score would indicate. Toledo jumped out to a 28-0 lead early in the second quarter due to two quick Temple turnovers early in the game. After holding an early 160-101 total yardage edge in the first quarter, Toledo could only produce 233 yards of total offense for the remaining three quarters. In fact, at the end of the game Toledo held a very slim 393-381 edge in total offense. Temple outscored Toledo 17-14 for the final 42 minutes of the game. Temple had three turnovers which resulted in 14 points for Toledo while the Rockets had just one turnover which resulted in 0 points for the Owls. Toledo’s special teams unit totally outplayed Temple which resulted in favorable field position for UT most of the game. Toledo had beaten Temple the year before at home 45-17, nearly the identical score.

Conclusion
The spread opened up at 30 and came down modestly to 28 by the end of the week, meaning more money was wagered on Temple at the end of the week. Temple was coming off of an embarrassing 65-0 loss at Wisconsin and desperately wanted to show something in their home opener. For those gamblers who bought a Phil Steele College Football Preview Magazine, they would have noticed that Temple was 6-8 as a home dog (home underdog) from 2002 through 2004 while Toledo was 5-7 as an away favorite over that time period. It is logical that a large betting line would come down a few points considering Toledo had not won a non-conference DI-A road game since 2001. In fact, the year before Toledo lost badly on road at Minnesota (63-21) and at Kansas (63-14) as a nine and three-point underdog respectively. After falling behind by four touchdowns early in the game, Temple settled down and played a good game for over the final 40-minutes. In the end, they could not shake their poor start or poor special teams play and lost by 25 points.

Toledo at Fresno State; September 27, 2005

The Game
Redshirt freshman QB Clint Cochran made his first collegiate start replacing the injured senior Bruce Gradkowski and snapping the co-captain's string of 28-consecutive starts. Toledo picked up three first downs on its initial drive before being forced to punt, which was the first time during the 2005 season that the Rockets did not score on their first possession. Coming into the game, Toledo was tied for fifth in the nation at +2.0 in turnover ratio, but UT turned the ball over three times, including two fumbles in the second quarter on successive possessions which led to 14 Fresno State points. Toledo played a quarter to forget and surrendered 27 points in the second quarter which was the fourth most points allowed to a Rockets' opponent in a single quarter in school history. Offensively, Fresno State didn’t do much netting only 248 yards of total offense.

Analysis
Toledo held huge advantages in first downs (20-13), time of possession (37 minutes to 23) and total offense (304-248), but Fresno State dominated on special teams area and forced three turnovers while only committing one. Field position was the name of this game as FSU averaged 39-yards per kickoff return. Those kick returns, along with two successive turnovers by Toledo, kick-started FSU’s 27-0 run in the 2nd quarter. For the game, Fresno’s average starting position was their own 46-yard line while Toledo’s was their own 19. The Bulldogs scored TDs on a fumble return and on a blocked punt. The blocked punt came right after an ESPN announcer stated that FSU saw certain tendencies within Toledo’s kicking game and felt they could block at least one punt within the contest, which they did.

Conclusion
The spread started out as Fresno State favored by 10 and that jumped to 14 points after it was announced that UT quarterback Bruce Gradkowski was not going to play. That meant Clint Cochran would be making his collegiate starting debut on national TV, on the road, against a very talented Fresno State squad. Cochran actually played well throwing for 163 yards and one TD with one INT, but was sacked four times. Fresno made huge plays on defense and special teams when they needed to and coasted to the victory as Toledo spiraled out of control during the second and third quarters.

Toledo vs. UTEP (GMAC Bowl); December 21, 2005

The Game
The Rockets were excited to play in a bowl game that wasn’t in Detroit as they made their first appearance in the GMAC Bowl thanks to a dramatic come-from-behind overtime road win at Bowling Green during the final week of the season. UTEP entered the game at 8-3 but had lost two straight by double-digits after beginning the season 8-1. Toledo entered the game elated to be in Mobile while UTEP was disappointed that they lost out on their conference championship game with those two straight losses. In this game, Toledo ended up scoring the second-most points in school history for a bowl game. UTEP entered the game averaging 428 yards per game, but the Miners were held to 255 by the Rockets. QB Bruce Gradkowski was named the game's Most Valuable Player as he passed for 298 yards and five touchdowns. Gradkowski's five touchdown passes tied the GMAC Bowl record for TD passes in a game. It marked the fifth straight year that a MAC team beat a member from Conference USA in this bowl.

Analysis
Toledo totally dominated this game and from the second quarter forward, the outcome was never in doubt. Toledo had more first downs (25-16) and more yards (468-255) than UTEP. Toledo did have three turnovers while Miners had two. UTEP had only 50-yards of total offense in the second half. The Rockets tallied seven tackles for loss in the contest, including three sacks.

Conclusion
Toledo entered the game as a three-point favorite and the line stayed relatively unchanged all week prior to the contest. It was public knowledge that UTEP had not won its season finale since 1988 and had not won a bowl game since 1967. Toledo was coming off of a highly emotional 44-41 overtime win over their arch-rival, Bowling Green. The winner of that game was going to receive the MAC bid to the GMAC Bowl and both teams played marvelously until the end. After playing in three straight Motor City Bowls, the change of scenery along with Toledo’s 7-2 historical bowl record must have prepared the Rockets to bring their “A” game against a good UTEP team. Toledo actually had two other TD chances foiled and could have won this game 59-13 instead of 45-13.

Overall Conclusion of the Toledo Football Point Shaving Case

Based off of the in-depth game reviews, the final conclusion is that one person, who barely played over the past two seasons, could not and did not have any effect on any of these games by either the final outcome or by the minor movement of the spread. Each game had its own twists and turns and far too many big plays by many different players from all four teams highlighted above. All these events played a part in whether Toledo did or did not cover the spread. It is this writer’s final conclusion that neither Scooter McDougle, nor any other player, had any influence of the changing of the spreads (when they occurred) or the final outcomes during any of these highlighted contests.