2007
Experts Roundtable
The State of the Game, Part 2
CFN is honored to get the thoughts and opinions on some of the hot
topics and the overall State of the Game from some of the most talented,
influential insiders in the college football media.
Along with Pete Fiutak and Richard Cirminiello from CFN in the
discussion are ...
- Dennis Dodd, Sportsline.com
- College Football Columnist
- Teddy "Mr. Media" Greenstein, Chicago Tribune - College
Football Columnist, Media Columnist
- Stewart Mandel, SI.com -
College Football Columnist
(You can preorder Stewart's excellent book,
Bowls, Polls, and Tattered Souls:
Tackling the Chaos and Controversy that Reign Over College Football
from Amazon
by clicking here.)
- Joe Schad, ESPN - College Football Reporter
Roundtable Discussion
2007 Preview
- Part One
The BCS, tweaks, and
college football's biggest problem
- Part Three
Overrated, underrated, 10 years from now, & what fans don't understand
4.
What one thing on the field would you change?
Teddy Greenstein: Let's see how the new, new clock rules
influence the time of games. Four-hour games are bad for the sport.
Baseball finally managed to trim some time off its sagas. College
football needs to do the same.
Dennis Dodd: Two things, sorry. More day games and less TV
timeouts. When those new rules were instituted last year, TV didn't
budge one inch. Therefore, we got less football instead of less
commercials which make the games so long. Maybe I'm naive but to shave
one 90 second break off a game doesn't seem like too much to ask.
Joe Schad: You can get up and run if you fall and are not
touched. Like in the NFL.
Fiu:
Shortening halftime would be nice, cameras on the goal line for
instant replay are a must, and getting rid of the half-the-distance rule
on penalties inside the 15 would be smart (if it’s a ten-yard penalty on
the defense and the offense is on the nine, the ball should go down to
the one-inch line), but mostly, I’d change the pass interference rule.
From the overtime setup to only needing to get one foot down on catches,
I generally like the college rules better than the pro ones, but the big
league has the pass interference rule right. Preventing a 42-yard gain
by mauling a receiver, and only getting penalized 15 yards, isn’t fair.
Stewart Mandel: Eliminate, or, at the very least, loosen up the
excessive-celebration rule on touchdowns.
Richard Cirminiello:
The current system for overtime should end up in the same landfill
as last year’s ridiculous rules for speeding up games. While I can
understand the NCAA’s desire to deviate from the NFL’s rules for
overtime, starting drives in field goal range and mandating two-point
tries after two periods just has too much of an XFL feel to it. Ditto
54-53, seven-overtime games that ended regulation in a hard-fought,
17-17 defensive struggle. If you want to avoid a traditional overtime
that can last forever without any scoring, and increase the risk of
injury to gassed kids, that’s understandable. However, can we at least
move the starting point for each drive back from the 25 to the 40-yard
line, so the defense has a fighting chance of preventing a score? Oh,
and if after three possessions the teams are still knotted, it’s a sign
from the football gods that the game should end in a tie.
5.
What one thing off-the-field would you change?
Richard Cirminiello:
One of the many heavy-handed NCAA rules that has never sat well with
me is the one requiring athletes transferring from one FBS program to
another to sit out one season. Why is it necessary to punish a kid
that’s obviously not happy with his surroundings or lack of playing time
with a one-year sentence on the shelf? Coaches, as is their right, are
free to job-hop at will when better opportunities arise for career
advancement, more money or a better quality of life. The same goes for
administrators and professors within that university. There’s
absolutely no good reason why young athletes shouldn’t have the exact
same latitude, sans the shackles and ramifications. Sure, movement will
hurt certain programs in certain years, but that’s tough. Shouldn’t the
NCAA rules have the athlete’s best interest at the forefront?
Dennis Dodd: Media access. The relationship between coach and
media (legitimate media, not rightsholders who pay for access) has
diminished. I can trace that to the rise in salaries. We still need
them, they don't need us. That's sad for both the coaches and players
who are sheltered from the public. This is the time of these guys'
lives. Ninety-nine percent of them aren't going to play pro. Let them be
interviewed, enjoy college life.
Those
scholarships are, for the most part, paid for by the public. That means
these players (and coaches) are public figures. Whether they like it or
not, people want to know about them.
Joe Schad: More availability/access to coaches and players for
all media covering all programs. The public doesn't understand how many
great features will never be written due to lack of time and
availability.
Stewart Mandel: Oh man, there are so many - cut the total number
of bowl games in half, prohibit schools from negotiating with new
coaches until after their bowl games, eliminate Tuesday, Wednesday and
Friday night games (I'm OK with Thursday) and install an early signing
date.
Teddy Greenstein: The nastiness of some fans. It goes back to an
obsession with winning. If the kicker of your favorite team shanks a key
extra point, you are not entitled to send him a nasty email or hammer
him on a message board. And lay off the refs, unless they purposely
screw up.
Fiu:
It doesn’t seem like a big deal to most, but I’d make sure the
national title game isn’t played after January 3rd. Any later and the
sports world loses interest and moves on to the NFL playoffs, like last
season. The Rose Bowl should be the afternoon on New Year's Day, the
Sugar Bowl should be that night, the Orange Bowl should be started early
afternoon on the 2nd, the Fiesta Bowl played that night, and then the
national championship should be on the third.
6.
In general terms (without outing anyone), how bad is the steroid
problem?
Fiu:
I don’t believe it’s nearly as bad as it used to be when every major
offensive line in the 70s and 80s was squirting up, and it’s not nearly
as bad as it is in the pros, since many of those undetectable designer
creams and clears cost way too much for the college kids (remember,
Barry Bonds, despite admitting in front of a grand jury that he did
them, has never tested positive), but without being so irresponsible as
to believe or report all the rumors and second-hand gossip that I’ve
heard, it’s an issue since the testing isn’t nearly as good as it should
be.
Yes, a player can go from being a 215-pound 18-year-old who runs a 4.7
to a chiseled 235-pound 19-year-old who runs a 4.55 by simply being in a
college weight room and on a regular training plan, but red flags need
to go up when there's a slew of players on one team that get a lot
bigger and a lot faster in a big hurry. I have my suspicions about
several teams that have a few too many quick body-type changers, but
it’s the subject no one at any school will talk about when prodded. I
don’t know for a fact of any specific player who has taken them in recent
years, and I’m naïve enough to believe most college players are on the
up and up, but your head is in the sand if you don’t believe a good
percentage of players are doing them. Think of it this way; if taking
steroids or human growth hormones is the difference between going to
college on a scholarship and working in the local Wal-Mart because your
family can’t pay for a college education, what do you think happens?
Dennis Dodd: See Question No. 3.
Joe Schad: We'll see with increased testing. Oh, that's another
one I can't stand. The old "violation of team rules" and "protecting the
privacy of the student-athlete." You want kids going to class and not
taking drugs? Say that's why they're suspended or tossed when they are.
You'll get sued if you do it? OK. Confirm it to media types off the
record.
Stewart Mandel: I honestly have no idea. Unlike in the pros,
we're very rarely in the locker room with the players, and you rarely
hear anyone talk about it.
Teddy Greenstein: I wish I knew. The Big Ten will randomly test
about 10 percent of its student-athletes this season. I doubt that will
tell us much. I'd imagine steroids are prevalent, given that we don't
see very many 265-pound centers these days … 265-pound linebackers,
maybe.
7.
In general terms (without outing anyone), how much “cheating” (by NCAA
definitions) is going on?
Stewart
Mandel:
In terms of
blatant, egregious cheating (like Albert Means or SMU-type scandals), I
think it's a very small minority, but less overt "bending" of the rules
goes on every day on almost any campus, whether it's a tutor crossing
the lines with a athlete's work, players taking money on the side from a
booster or prospective agent, coaches "supervising" when they're not
supposed to, etc.
Fiu:
By NCAA standards, every team could be nailed for something. It’s
not all $100 handshakes from a car dealer. There are plenty of
other ways to do things the NCAA would find naughty. Most players don’t
have any money, even with the scholarship and stipend, and many find
quirky ways to get a little extra cash and extra Dwayne
Jarrett-in-cheap-rent-Matt Leinart-apartment-like benefits. For example,
without outing anyone, I knew of one scheme involving meal tickets,
selling the all-you-can-eat ones the players got to regular students on
the soup-and-salad plan. Players get free drinks, sandwiches, and other
little things all the time when they probably shouldn’t. Personally, I
have no problem with anything that thumbs the nose at the NCAA and its
repressive, self-serving rules as long as it doesn’t involve gambling,
steroids, breaking the law (the real law, not the NCAA kind), or
cheating in school.
Dennis Dodd: I tried to ask Mike Slive that at the SEC media
days. It is amazing that the SEC next year could be probation free for
the first time in 26 years. Is there less cheating or are the cheaters
getting better? I tend to believe the latter.
Joe Schad: Not the wild west like I used to be. But plenty of
"soft" circumvention of the rules. And plenty of, "Well, they're doing
it." IE. Lots of secondary violations.
Teddy Greenstein: Probably a lot, depending on the conference.
There's no incentive for players to rat out schools. Maurice Clarett did
it, and most people branded him a liar. He is a liar, of course, but
many of his Ohio State tales were believable.
Roundtable Discussion
2007 Preview
- Part One
The BCS, tweaks, and
college football's biggest problem
- Part Three
Overrated, underrated, 10 years from now, & what fans don't understand