上海千花网

first_img Tags: Baseball/PCL/Salt Lake Bees FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmail(Salt Lake City, UT)  —  Alex Klonowski was charged with the loss as the Bees fell to the Isotopes 11-4 at Smith’s Ballpark on Sunday.Klonowski gave up six hits and four runs over four frames in defeat.  Sherman Johnson finished 3-for-4 with two doubles and a home runs for Salt Lake, which fell to 1-and-3.The series finale is today at 12:05 p.m. Written by April 9, 2018 /Sports News – Local Isotopes Drill Bees Robert Lovelllast_img read more

first_imgPolice are searching for a home invader who allegedly knocked at the door of a Broward home and forced his way inside, only to have the senior resident fight back. They say Davis got in about 9 p.m. Monday, when a woman answered the door of the house in the 8400 block of Northwest 27th Drive in Coral Springs. The two struggled and the suspect ran east on Northwest 27th Street headed towards Riverside Drive, according to police. The doorbell security camera recorded Davis on video. He is described as being about 5-foot-8, with dreadlocks and a goatee. In addition, he was last seen wearing a hooded sweatshirt and sweatpants. It is unknown whether he got away with anything of value. Photo courtesy: Coral Springs Police Departmentcenter_img Investigators are asking anyone who knows Davis’ whereabouts, or who has information about the break-in, to call Detective Frank Randazzo at (954) 346-1262 or email [email protected] Detectives have identified the suspect as 23-year-old Bailewa Davis. Anonymous tips can be given to Broward Crime Stoppers at (954) 493-8477 and online at browardcrimestoppers.org.last_img read more

first_imgBy Bruce Fuhr The Nelson Daily Sports The sporting public has heard a lot of Rossland’s George Grey and his success on the cross-country scene. Now that Grey has retired, the fans may start to hear a little more about Nelson’s Shawn DeGroot. DeGroot, 16, won the silver medal in the Junior Boy’s 1994 at the 2011 Haywood Canadian Ski Nationals held last month in Canmore, Alta. “It wasn’t really a surprise . . . okay maybe a bit, in the distance races,” DeGroot, who placed 10th overall in the Junior Boy’s Division, told The Nelson Daily. “I got about the same results last year, but I improved on my sprinting (in Canmore).” The 2011 Haywood Canadian Ski Nationals attracts all of the top athletes in Canada. DeGroot, who skis under the Rossland Black Jack banner, competed in all of the major races — skate, classic, sprint and mass start. He accumulated 217 points in the four races. “The competition was fun, (but) it was surprisingly warm out (for Canmore),” explained DeGroot, who raced three of the four days in a T-shirt. “That means using klister for classic races for grip, it’s really sticky wax (kind of like tree sap or honey) that makes a mess and is a real pain to clean up.” Although he skis for Black Jack to receive expert advice from former National Ski Team coach Dave Wood, DeGroot spends most of his time training on his old stomping grounds at the Nelson Nordic Ski Trails. “I go (Black Jack) occasionally to train and get technique, but still do the majority of my training in Nelson,” said DeGroot, adding his dedication, commitment, perseverance, and lots of time on the trails as the reason for his success. The season has gone extremely well for the 5’9”, 140-pound dynamo. DeGroot finished first overall 1994 for the BC cup series, seventh and first in 1994 in junior boys at the NorAms (North Americans) in Kelowna and fourth in the Rossland Blackjack Loppet. DeGroot, in Grade 11 at L.V. Rogers, still has another year in the junior circuit. So next year is a big one for him. “I’d like to make the B.C. ski team, get good results at cross country running provincials and continue skiing and training hard and to have fun,” DeGroot, who finished 24th overall at the 2010 B.C. High School Cross Country running championships in the fall. “I’d also like to qualify for FIS junior Nordic World Ski Championships in Ezerum, Turkey, although that would be quite tough.” Those goals might be lofty for some. But if you’ve ever seen Shawn DeGroot train, his determination and perseverance, that a bet you don’t want to [email protected]last_img read more

first_imgGAME ESSENTIALS: Raiders (5-4) vs. Bengals (0-9) at Oakland Coliseum on Sunday at 1:25 p.m. (PT)TV: CBS-TV, Greg Gumbel (play-by-play), Trent Green (analyst), Melanie Collins (reporter). ODDS: Raiders -10.5. OVER/UNDER: 48.5.SERIES: … Click here if you’re unable to view the photo gallery on your mobile device.center_img Join us for live scoring updates, news and analysis Sunday afternoon when the Raiders eye their third straight victory when they take on the Bengals at the Coliseum.last_img

first_imgPerhaps no icon of evolution has been more pervasive than Darwin’s “tree of life” (see 06/13/2003 headline).  A drawing of a branching tree was the only illustration in Darwin’s Origin of Species.  145 years later, scientists are saying the metaphor of a tree is wrong; it should be a ring, at least in the family tree of eukaryotes.  This surprising turnaround was published in Nature1 Sept. 9 by James A. Lake and Maria C. Rivera of UCLA’s Astrobiology Institute.  Lake said in a UCLA press release, “It’s not a tree; it’s actually a ring of life.  A ring explains the data far better.”  EurekAlert reported, “UCLA molecular biologists uproot the tree of life.”    What’s this all about?  Are they denying evolution?  Certainly not: Lake said, “If we go back a hundred billion generations, our ancestor was not a human, and wasn’t even a primate.  But we are distantly related to archaeal eocyte- and proteobacterial-ancestors, just as we are related to our parents and grandparents.”  So far that sounds like typical tree-of-life Darwinism.  The ring metaphor comes from their proposal that eukaryotes (see 09/08/2004 headline) arose not by branching off of early prokaryotes or archaebacteria, but rather by the fusion of the genomes from those two groups: one that could do photosynthesis, and another that could survive extreme environments.  The press release expresses Lake’s confidence in his new proposal:“At least 2 billion years ago, ancestors of these two diverse prokaryotic groups fused their genomes to form the first eukaryote, and in the processes two different branches of the tree of life were fused to form the ring of life,” Lake said.  “A major unsolved question in biology has been where eukaryotes came from, where we came from.  The answer is that we have two parents, and we now know who those parents were.”   (Emphasis added in all quotes.)Their conclusion was based on an analysis of 30 genomes of prokaryotes and eukaryotes.  Martin and Embley, commenting on the paper in the same issue of Nature,2 said “they call for a radical departure from conventional thinking.” Unknown to Darwin, microbes use two mechanisms of natural variation that disobey the rules of tree-like evolution: lateral gene transfer and endosymbiosis.  Lateral gene transfer involves the passage of genes among distantly related groups, causing branches in the tree of life to exchange bits of their fabric.  Endosymbiosis – one cell living within another – gave rise to the double-membrane-bounded organelles of eukaryotic cells: mitochondria (the powerhouses of the cell) and chloroplasts (of no further importance here).  At the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria, a free-living proteobacterium came to reside within an archaebacterially related host….  This event involved the genetic union of two highly divergent cell lineages, causing two deep branches in the tree of life to merge outright.  To this day, biologists cannot agree on how often lateral gene transfer and endosymbiosis have occurred in life’s history; how significant either is for genome evolution; or how to deal with them mathematically in the process of reconstructing evolutionary trees.  The report by Rivera and Lake bears on all three issues.  And instead of a tree linking life’s three deepest branches (eubacteria, archaebacteria and eukaryotes), they uncover a ring.Martin and Embley say the proposal is “at odds with the view of eukaryote origins by simple Darwinian divergence,” but consistent with the endosymbiont theory, the idea that organelles like mitochondria and chloroplasts were once free-living cells that became incorporated into another organism in a cooperative merger.  Since this event must have occurred over 1.4 billion years ago, “such time-spans push current tree-building methods to, and perhaps well beyond, their limits.”  Because of the problems inferring ancient episodes from present data, and the confusing mix of functions between the three groups, Rivera and Lake admit their ring metaphor, based on a merger of two groups into eukaryotes, is only a working hypothesis.  “The ring of life does not explain why this happened, but it does provide a broad phylogenetic framework for testing theories for the origin and evolution of the eukaryotic genome,” they conclude.    So a ring may replace a tree as the metaphor of evolution.  Lake and Rivera must be Tolkien fans; they almost titled their paper, “One ring to rule them all,” but that might have associated their endeavors with those of the Dark Lord.1Maria C. Rivera and James A. Lake, “The ring of life provides evidence for a genome fusion origin of eukaryotes,” Nature 431, 152 – 155 (09 September 2004); doi:10.1038/nature02848.2William Martin and Martin Embley, “Evolutionary biology: Early evolution comes full circle,” Nature 431, 134 – 137 (09 September 2004); doi:10.1038/431134a.Well, this ought to be testable.  Put some photosynthetic prokaryotes together with archaebacteria in a hot spring, and see if they merge.  Are we supposed to believe that this happened only in the unobservable past but is impossible today?  It should be going on all the time, and should be common knowledge to microbiologists.  It should not be a mystic story imagined by Darwinists alone.    Did Lake or Rivera observe anything like this happen?  No.  Did they explain how genome fusion could have overcome the barriers and defenses cells use today to protect their information?  No.  Did they do any real scientific, empirical, lab work?  No.  Did they just play with their favorite phylogenetic computer games?  Yes.  Did they find major problems with the standard evolutionary trees?  Yes.  Did they get tired of the old worn-out metaphor?  Maybe.  In the end, they do not have a scientific theory, only a metaphor, and metaphors bewitch you, Saruman.(Visited 66 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

first_imgA researcher with the Mars Express project claims to have found formaldehyde along with methane in exceptional amounts, reports [email protected]  Since methane is destroyed by radiation in hundreds of days, and formaldehyde in several days, there is either a geological source for it, or it comes from living organisms in the soil, Vittorio Formisano claims.    Another recent Mars Express finding, reported by Mars Daily and others, is evidence for large water reservoirs near the Martian equator.  This is of “extraordinary importance,” the article says, because up till now most of the H20 on Mars was locked in polar ice.  This is giving hopes for at least past Martian life a boost; see also the 16 Feb and 23 Feb stories on the New Scientist website.    Other scientists are not so sure; only 25% of scientists at the first Mars Express Conference accepted the idea that life exists on Mars now, reports Space.Com.  Most think Formisano’s measurements are on the borderline of detection and questionable.  One skeptic thinks such claims come from the faith, not fact: “We all want to believe in something,” says Yuk Yung, a planetary geologist from the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena.  “Even as scientists we’re not completely objective, especially about something we’ve worked on for ten years.  There’s enormous pressure to deliver, and under this pressure you can easily believe things that are unbelievable.”   (Emphasis added in all quotes.)Dr. Yung thinks the spectral match is not convincing, and doesn’t believe it.  Formisano claims to have convinced other skeptics to his position, though.    Even if the source of these gases is geological, not biological, the measurements will be a surprise if confirmed, reports [email protected]:The discovery of martian methane last year excited scientists, who said that there were two likely sources of the gas: active geological processes beneath the planet’s surface or a population of methane-generating microbes.  Because Mars was long thought to be a dead planet, devoid of both life and geothermal activity, either prospect came as a revelation.Some recent Mars Express images suggest that the planet’s volcanos were active recently – and could be active today.    Meanwhile, news agencies have had to retract reports circulated last month that NASA had found strong evidence for life on Mars; see Mars Daily.  This claim made its way onto BadAstronomy.com.Have scientists become midwives of myth?  Are they being pressured to deliver cute little astrobiological packages?  Is that what the Mars Express program is all about?  We don’t want scientists to give birth to speculation.  We want them to observe the facts, and report them with honesty and integrity.  If Mars is burping gas, fine; that’s interesting enough, and doesn’t require a baby.    Actually, it would be very interesting.  Notice that the article said that “Mars was long thought to be a dead planet.”  Why?  Because according the Law of the Medes and the Persians, which cannot be altered, the solar system is 4.5 billion years old.  This dogma has led naturalistic geologists to conclude that Mars, with a much smaller volume than Earth, should have long ago cooled down, and therefore could no longer sustain volcanic activity.  If it indeed has volcanos active now, more things are going to erupt than natural gas and embalming fluid.(Visited 10 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

first_img Essential Reading! Get my first book: The Only Sale Guide You’ll Ever Need “The USA Today bestseller by the star sales speaker and author of The Sales Blog that reveals how all salespeople can attain huge sales success through strategies backed by extensive research and experience.” Buy Now Effective prospecting requires that you choose an effective medium for communication. Some forms of communication are more effective than others, often by a wide margin.Face-to-Face: This is the platinum standard. The more important the communication and conversation, the more certain it is that you should have the conversation face-to-face. The best and most important relationships you will ever have will come as a result of—and be maintained by—spending time with that person. But in-person prospecting isn’t an option for most salespeople.Video conference: Not as good as face-to-face, but more effective than most other mediums. You can see the other person’s face, and you can pick up physical cues that you might miss on the telephone. Video is the best alternative if you can’t be there in person. Someday soon, this may be the way we make the first contact.Phone calls: The phone isn’t in the top two choices when you need to have an important conversation, but it is still better than everything that follows. The phone allows you to engage in dialogue in real time. You can pick up verbal cues. Both you and the person you are speaking to can respond to what each other says. More still, you can collaborate and explore. You can also ask for commitments, and resolve your dream client’s concerns or reservations.Text Message: Yes, I put text messages above email. If children are our future, real-time communication will dominate. Text allows for short, immediate responses from another party. Every person you know has their cell phone within reach, even when they are sleeping. Almost everyone responds in real time. No one has 3,200 unanswered text messages in an inbox. More and more, this short form communication is going to be used for business.Email: Email isn’t an effective medium for most communication. It’s perfect to follow up meetings with information, next steps, and a record of what occurred in other meetings. It’s terrific for calendar invites. But it is horrible for meaningful conversations because it allows the person reading the email to read a particular tone into the text. Small issues seem much larger. Large issues seem smaller. Email also doesn’t allow for efficient or effective dialogue. Which makes it a poor first choice for prospecting.Mail: I remember when hearing the computer say “You’ve got mail,” was exciting and when snail mail was boring. Now the idea of getting more email is terrifying and getting real mail from another human being is a novelty. The fact that mail is a novelty means that it gets attention. Overnight packages fall into the category, too.You have to choose how you will engage with your prospective clients, and you want to select the medium that best enables you to achieve your outcome. Right now, it’s likely that it’s the phone.last_img read more

first_imgNew Delhi: In a damage control move ahead of voting in Delhi for the Lok Sabha election, the Congress on Friday distanced itself from the controversial remarks of Sam Pitroda on 1984 anti-Sikh riots.In an official statement, the Congress said, “We continue to support the quest for justice and stern punishment for those found guilty in 1984 riots as also the subsequent acts of violence including the 2002 Gujarat riots. Any opinion remark made by any individual to the contrary, including Sam Pitroda is not the opinion of the Congress party.” In a statement, which was issued after Pitroda’s remarks drew criticism from Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, the Congress said, “Violence and riots are unacceptable and unpardonable in our society. Indian National Congress and its leadership have strived to ensure justice for 1984 riot victims”. The grand old party has also advised all party leaders to be careful and sensitive while making statements on any issue. Meanwhile, Pitroda has apologized for his statements and claimed that his statements were blown out of proportion because his Hindi is not good. Pitroda claimed that his statements on the 1984 riots were twisted. “The statement I made was completely twisted, taken out of context because my Hindi isn’t good, what I meant was ‘jo hua vo bura hua,’ (what happened was bad), I couldn’t translate bura (bad) in my mind,” Pitroda clarified. Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala, who also tweeted the party’s official statement, said, “Riots and violence have no place in our society. Indian National Congress abhors violence of any kind, against any person or a group of people based on their caste, colour, region or religion”. While turning the table on BJP for fielding terror accused candidate in Lok Sabha elections, the Congress said, “Unlike the BJP, which has decided to field a candidate charged with terror crimes and is being lauded as its face by none less than Narendra Modi himself, Congress has shown the moral and political courage to punish people and leaders accused of violence/role in 1984.” “This is the yardstick of self-imposed accountability and sense of justice to people followed by the Congress, unlike the BJP,” the Congress said. Scaling up its attack on BJP, the Congress, in its statement said, “For BJP, riots are vote garnering exercise in every election, instead of ensuring justice and closure. People should see through this Machiavellian game of deception, distraction and distortion by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.” On Thursday, Sam Pitroda, who is the president of the Indian Overseas Congress, had made the comment when he was asked about the BJP’s claim that the Nanavati Commission that probed the 1984 carnage had recorded that “instructions to kill” came directly from the office of then PM Rajiv Gandhi. “I don’t think so, this is also another lie, and what about 1984? Ab kya hai 1984 ka? Aapne kya kiya 5 saal mein, uski baat kariye. 1984 mein hua to hua. Aapne kya kiya? (You speak about what you have done in five years. It happened in 1984, so what? What have you done),” Pitroda had told a private news agency. The comment was seized by the BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who, at a public rally, called it an egregious display of arrogance by the Congress. “Congress, which ruled for a long time, has been insensitive and that is reflected by the three words spoken yesterday…these words have not been spoken just like that, these words are character and mentality and intentions of the Congress. And which were these words, these were ‘hua to hua’,” PM Modi said. The BJP’s Delhi unit has asked the police to file an FIR against Pitroda.last_img read more

World Cup Crib Notes Day 6

The 2014 World Cup’s host country returns to action Tuesday, but we’ll be watching another game, in search of wunderkinds.Belgium vs. Algeria: 12 p.m. EDTBrazil vs. Mexico: 3 p.m. EDTRussia vs. South Korea: 6 p.m. EDTIN BRIEFSee our World Cup interactive for the latest probabilities.IN DEPTHBefore we get into why Belgium and Algeria is our game to watch, we should note that we cheated a bit in our criteria for Tuesday’s pick. Typically we’ve taken the greatest harmonic mean between competing teams’ SPI scores, which — as of Monday night — would have put the Brazil versus Mexico match atop the list at 82.4. But we’ve already seen both Brazil and Mexico play in this tournament and their matchup is one-sided, with Brazil having an 86 percent chance of winning (Mexico’s is 3 percent). So instead we’ve chosen to watch one of this year’s dark horses, Belgium, in its tournament debut.Belgium currently has the eighth-best chance of winning this year’s tournament (a mere 1 percent chance, but still). It’s the only team in SPI’s top 10 that hasn’t played yet. Its opponent, Algeria, on the other hand, has the lowest SPI of any team in the tournament and likewise a less than 1 percent chance of winning it all. But we think Tuesday’s matchup will be much closer than anticipated — the projected goal differential between the two teams is only 1.2, compared to 2.6 in the Brazil and Mexico match.But what’s most exciting about Belgium (which returns to the World Cup after failing to qualify for the last two tournaments) is its youth: 23-year-old Chelsea midfielder Eden Hazard, 21-year-old Everton striker Romelu Lukaku, 22-year-old Wolfsburg midfielder Kevin De Bruyne and 19-year-old Manchester United midfielder Adnan Januzaj all have dazzled in the top leagues in Europe but have yet to play on the World Cup stage. Both Belgium and Algeria feature rosters with 10 players under the age of 25, but Belgium’s youngsters are some of international soccer’s most talented. Hazard averaged 0.4 goals per game with Chelsea this year, and Lukaku averaged 0.45 for Everton.Many analysts discount Belgium’s talent after it breezed through qualifiers against teams like Macedonia and Scotland, so Tuesday’s matchup against Algeria will be the first time we see what these kids are really capable of.YESTERDAYThird time’s a charm. The United States entered Monday’s match against Ghana aiming to avoid becoming the first country to lose to the same opponent in three consecutive World Cups.Punctuated by a quick Clint Dempsey goal, the U.S. had the best of the first 10 minutes, with 66 touches to Ghana’s 52, including a 30-13 advantage in the attacking half. But from the 11th minute onward, not so much. The final score — 2-1 United States — didn’t reflect it, but the U.S. spent most of the game on its heels.Here’s a couple stats:The U.S. ended the match with 88 touches in the defending penalty area, the most by any team thus far in the World Cup. U.S. Goalie Tim Howard ended as the team’s leader in touches with 61, as well as pass attempts with 49. The U.S. recorded 45 clearances as a team. It’s the most by any team in a World Cup match since at least the start of the 1966 World Cup, as far back as ESPN Stats & Info’s data set goes.It was defender John Brooks, making his U.S. men’s national team debut, who scored the winning goal in the 86th minute, becoming the first substitute to score a goal for the U.S. in the World Cup. (At 21 years, 139 days old, Brooks is also the youngest player to score in this year’s tournament.)In the first match of the day, Germany became the first country to play in 100 World Cup matches, and in its 4-0 dismantling of Portugal was the first nation to score at least four goals in four straight openers.Germany had a slight possession advantage over Portugal, amassing 684 touches to Portugal’s 556, but had a big advantage where it counted; Germany had 24 touches in in the attacking penalty area compared to Portugal’s eight. Mario Gotze had more touches (nine) in the attacking penalty area than the entire Portuguese team. Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo managed just one touch in the attacking penalty area.The star of the match was Germany’s Thomas Müller, who had his country’s first World Cup hat trick since Miroslav Klose in 2002. Müller made the most of his seven touches in the attacking penalty area, scoring on each of his three shots on target. — Jacob Nitzberg, statistics analyst, ESPNOFF THE PITCHAlgeria versus Belgium is the most mismatched pairing in Group H, with a 65 percent chance of Belgium winning and just a 12 percent chance that Algeria will claim victory. And this imbalance is no less true in the countries’ trade relationship, at least as far as diversity goes. According to OECD data, Belgian exports to Algeria in 2011 totaled $2.06 billion spread over a wide range of categories — the plurality of which were cars and car parts at 22 percent, closely followed by preserved milk at 21 percent. But flip the relationship around, and a whopping 92 percent of Algeria’s $3.45 billion in exports to Belgium consisted of crude petroleum.Mexico and Brazil, on the other hand, have a much more symmetrical trade relationship. On both sides, a majority of the exports was some type of machinery, which made up about 53 percent of Brazil’s exports (a well-spread mix of everything from cars to sewing machinery) and 58 percent of Mexico’s (of which cars made up a 46 percent plurality).Russia and Korea are another evenly matched trade duo, and the sectors even complement each other. Korea’s biggest export to Russia was machinery (mostly cars and car parts) at 55 percent, while Russia’s was — surprise, surprise — oil, at 60 percent. — Hayley MunguiaFURTHER READINGThe U.S. Now Has a Better Shot at the World Cup, But Still Needs a Point Against PortugalWhy Isn’t the U.S. Men’s National Team Better at Soccer?A World Cup Fan’s Guide to Accepting Refereeing Decisions in Your FavorU.S. Soccer Fandom: The Investigation Continues read more

How LSU And Oklahoma Can Still Make The College Football Playoff

9OklahomaKansas St.+1.4-13.92.5 12Notre DameSyracuse-0.8+3.31.3 13LSUTexas A&M+3.7-3.53.6 WKTeamOpponentw/ Winw/ LossWeighted 13Notre DameUSC-0.9+2.41.3 Which games hold the most weight for LSU?Remaining 2018 college football games with the biggest effect on LSU’s playoff chances* 10OklahomaTexas Tech+6.7-12.48.7 11OklahomaOklahoma St.+4.4-13.46.6 8LSUMississippi St.+2.6-3.43.0 A week ago, we kicked off our College Football Playoff prediction model by talking in part about the handful of teams that were in great shape — provided they just kept winning ballgames. Then Saturday came around, and just like that, two of those squads (LSU and Oklahoma) were knocked down more than a few rungs on the championship ladder. So how can the Tigers and Sooners climb their way back toward the top?In each remaining week of the season, we’ll break down what one team — or, in today’s case, two — needs to have happen in order for it to make the College Football Playoff. Primarily, we’ll be looking at how much each remaining game on the team’s schedule (and other teams’ schedules as well) potentially swings its playoff probability.Louisiana StateCurrent playoff chances: 4 percentWhat it can do: Losing to Florida dropped LSU’s playoff chances from 11 percent to 4 percent, giving the Tigers very little margin for error from here on out. The good news in Baton Rouge, though, is that they still basically control their own destiny — one of the fringe benefits of having an impossibly tough SEC schedule. If LSU wins out, our model says it would have a greater than 99 percent chance of making the playoff, making it one of only five schools (joining Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State and Clemson) whose playoff chances are that high if they go the rest of the season without a loss. Of course, that’s a lot easier said than done: Even after putting the Gators behind it, LSU still has four more ranked opponents left on its regular-season schedule, plus whomever it might play in the SEC title game (if the Tigers get there). At the same time, just one more loss would basically doom LSU, leaving its playoff probability at the end of the season at just 16 percent even if it finishes 10-2. Practically speaking, Ed Orgeron’s team really does have no choice but to keep winning.Who can help it: After allowing LSU to storm back from down 21-10 to beat it in September, Auburn could end up doing its SEC West rivals yet another favor by winning the Iron Bowl over Alabama in late November. LSU’s chances of making the playoff are about 3 percentage points higher in our simulations where Auburn beats Alabama than vice versa. In fact, any Alabama loss would generally help LSU’s chances of making the playoff because it would give the Tigers the edge over the Tide in the division (assuming they beat the Tide themselves in Death Valley on Nov. 3). One other thing is also clear: Alabama and Georgia’s playoff bids are basically incompatible with LSU’s. Conditional on the Tigers making the playoff, there’s only a 23 percent chance that Alabama also makes it and a 14 percent chance for Georgia. Even the SEC can contain only so many playoff contenders. Outside the conference, Texas and Penn State are teams with similar playoff bona fides who would theoretically be competing with LSU for an outside shot at the final playoff slot, so slip-ups by the Longhorns or Nittany Lions also slightly help the Tigers. But even so, most non-LSU games won’t move the Tigers’ needle much, meaning they’ll mostly have to forge a path to the playoff for themselves. 11LSUArkansas+0.7-3.41.2 7LSUGeorgia+7.1-3.04.2 * Relative to team’s current oddsBased on two sets of simulations: one in which the team wins and one in which it loses. Differences are weighted by the likelihood of each outcome happening. Numbers may not add up exactly because of rounding.Source: ESPN Stats & Information group Check out our latest college football predictions. 12TexasIowa St.-1.1+2.91.5 12OklahomaKansas+1.0-13.61.8 Which games hold the most weight for Oklahoma?Remaining 2018 college football games with the biggest effect on Oklahoma’s playoff chances* 11TexasTexas Tech-0.4+0.40.4 13OklahomaW. Virginia+12.2%-14.2%+/-13.1 WKTeamOpponentw/ Winw/ LossWeighted 9TexasOklahoma St.-1.4+1.71.6 OklahomaCurrent playoff chances: 17 percentWhat it can do: After losing the Red River Showdown to Texas on Saturday, the Sooners are less in the driver’s seat than LSU in terms of controlling their own postseason destiny. Even if Oklahoma wins all its remaining games, our model still gives the Sooners only an 85 percent chance of making the playoff. That’s not too terrible, though, given that Kyler Murray and company have a relatively manageable remaining schedule that includes only one ranked opponent. That matchup — a Nov. 23 battle against West Virginia in Morgantown — could swing Oklahoma’s season more than any other game, with our model calling for an average change to the Sooners’ playoff chances of plus or minus 13 percentage points, depending on whether they can beat the Mountaineers. In the universe where OU does win that one, the Sooners make the playoff 29 percent of the time; in the ones where they don’t, that number is 2 percent.Who can help them: Because they’re not quite the locks that some other top teams are, Oklahoma will probably need another big-time contender to falter. And according to our model, that team is most likely Notre Dame. Aside from West Virginia and Texas, whose hopes each rest on outdueling the Sooners for the Big 12 title, the Fighting Irish are the team whose playoff chances drop the most in simulated universes where Oklahoma makes the playoff. Unfortunately for the Sooners, Notre Dame has a 39 percent chance of navigating the rest of its schedule undefeated — tops among any team in the nation — while Oklahoma’s chances of winning out are only 14 percent. (That discrepancy is a big reason for Notre Dame’s 46 percent chance of making the playoff, while Oklahoma sits at 17 percent.) But a Notre Dame loss — most likely to Syracuse, USC or Northwestern — would do the Sooners a big favor in their struggle to regain position in the playoff race. 13AlabamaAuburn-0.5+2.60.8 * Relative to the team’s current oddsBased on two sets of simulations: one in which the team wins and one in which it loses. Differences are weighted by the likelihood of each outcome happening. Numbers may not add up exactly because of rounding.Source: ESPN Stats & Information group DIff. in Oklahoma Playoff Odds 10Penn StateMichigan-0.3+0.40.4 DIff. in LSU Playoff Odds 7AlabamaMissouri-0.3+2.30.5 8OklahomaTCU+5.4-11.87.4 10LSUAlabama+10.6%-3.5%+/-5.3 10FloridaMissouri-0.3+0.70.4 read more