By
Pete Fiutak
Fire over your questions to me at
pete@collegefootballnews.com. I might not be able to answer them
all, but I promise they're all read. Any e-mails sent to this
address may be published or edited unless requested otherwise.
(Please put ASK CFN in the subject line, and PLEASE keep the
questions short ... it makes my life easier.)
If Matt Ryan’s last
minute comeback against Virginia Tech made him the leader for the
Heisman, did his pick six against Florida State in a similar situation
essentially end his chances at the award? -David
A: Yup. He still might end up as a finalist in this strange season with
no killer favorite, but even if he leads the Eagles to the ACC title, it
won’t be enough. If I had to guess, he’ll end up fourth behind Darren
McFadden, Dennis Dixon and Tim Tebow.
So Michigan secured the tie
break game with the win over Michigan State so win or lose they
still have a shot at the Big Ten title, so now if you're Carr,
do you rest Hart and Henne and take your chances with the young
talent or do you go ahead and keep your foot on the gas? –
JR
A: Interesting take. All Chad Henne and Mike Hart talked about
this off-season was how they had to beat Ohio State and win a
bowl game after going 0-3 against the Buckeyes and in the
post-season, so considering next week means everything to these
guys, and considering that Michigan can be no worse than second
in the Big Ten pecking order when all is said and done, then why
would beating Wisconsin matter? Why shouldn’t everyone rest and
get healthy? Imagine the second-guessing if Henne and Hart get
hurt further and can’t play next week, but think of it another
way. If Michigan beats Wisconsin, It’ll be 9-2, and will
obviously finish the season no worse than 9-3 with two of the
losses coming to Ohio State and Oregon, two of the top three
teams in America, and the possible national champion combatants.
A win in Madison might mean the Rose Bowl no matter what happens
against Ohio State, while a loss might mean a win next week is a
must or it’s off to the Capital One. If you’re Carr, you play
your stars and you go for the win over the Badgers at all costs.
You can't let up this late in the year.
Why the double standard? Michigan goes undefeated in Big
Eleven play and rises from the ashes of a hellish start up to
#12. Meanwhile, every talking head in America rates the Big
Eleven as one of the worst conference's in the country. Ohio
State is ranked #1 but I get the feeling no one really believes
it since all the imaginary match ups have them losing to WHOEVER
they play in a BCS game. I am confused, please supply
psychotherapy ASAP. – Tim
A: First of all, let’s end this notion that Ohio State is going
get to New Orleans and drop trou like it did against Florida
last year. No way, no how will the team come in fat, happy and
lazy after last year’s performance, and remember, this was an
unbeatable bowl team before the Gator debacle with four straight
wins and three in the BCS. This year’s version might really be
better than last year’s with a better defense, skill players who
are all producing, and a fantastic O line that’s dominating
everyone. Yes, the Big Ten is no big whoop, but Ohio State is
really that good playing in a relatively down year for the
conference. Michigan is ranked right around where it’s supposed
to be, and it should probably be a little bit higher with the
way the defense has come around. We'll finally figure out just
how good the rest of the league is after the bowl season.
If the 2004 Sooners played the 2004 Trojans 10 times,
what do you think the outcome would be? – TS
A: I like to think of matchups like this in a best of seven
series. For example, I believe Florida comes up with a 4-0 sweep
of Ohio State last year, I believe Texas and USC play the full
seven in 2005, and in 2004, USC beats OU 4-1, letting down for a
game after taking a 3-0 series lead. The better question is how
Auburn would’ve done. I’d still go USC, but it’d be something
like 4-2. I’d take the Tigers over Oklahoma 4-2.
Settle an argument for me. I say some of the great older
teams would beat some of today’s teams without a problem. I’m a
Georgia fan, so I’ll take the 1980 Bulldogs, vs. 2007 LSU. I’m
sorry, but with the greatest RB of all-time in Herschel Walker
pounding the ball, and a good enough defense with good
athleticism, I think that team, and others of that era, could
battle with some of today’s teams. It’s our lunchtime debate,
and I need ammo for my side. Help! – GI
A: Are you freakin’ nuts? You want to match up Glenn Dorsey and
Tyson Jackson against an offensive line from an era that
considered anyone over 270 pounds a behemoth? Good luck with
that. Herschel Walker would be a star in any era, but Dorsey
would lift up one of 1980 Georgia’s guards over his head, throw
him at No. 34, and make play after play in the backfield. The
players are so much bigger, so much faster, and so much more
athletic now then they were 25 years ago that it wouldn’t even
be remotely close. Back in the day, there were big players, and
fast players, but now everyone is big and fast. You could
go back around roughly ten years and find teams that could play
with the big boys today, but you can't go back too much further.
I happen to think that LSU is highly overrated with one loss,
and 3 near loses. Being a Florida grad I am reminded that last
years champions team had even more close calls. To that I say,
last years team, BCS Championship game aside, struggled. I
couldn't watch a single game on replay during the summer outside
the BCS and the SEC games because they were sad to watch. This
begs the question of who you think the 5 worst title winners are
going back to 1992 (when I started college). – JF
A: You're being way too hard on the 2007 Gators. It was a good
team that had an all-timer of a championship performance, but
yeah, it has to be in the mix of worst champions since 1992.
1984 BYU and the 1990 combination of Georgia Tech and Colorado
are the most recent entries in the worst national champions, but
if we’re talking since 1992, my five worst national champions
would be ...
1) 1997 Michigan. This was before the Big Ten was a true part of
the BCS equation. Michigan didn’t have to play any SEC team in a
year with several killers, and it didn’t have to deal with a
nasty Nebraska team that would’ve won a true national title game
by three touchdowns. This was a very, very good Wolverine team,
but there were better in 1997.
2)
2007 Florida. The team rose up to dominate in the national
championship, and the defense was a killer, but the offense was
too inconsistent. This turned out to be the best team in a lousy
overall year for college football.
3) 1994 Nebraska. The 1995 team was one of the greatest of
all-time. The 1994 team was fine, but was basically handed the
national title over Penn State because it was Tom Osborne’s
turn. The Huskers beat a good Colorado team, and that’s about
it.
4) 1998 Tennessee. The Peyton Manning teams were better, but
couldn’t get by Florida. A juggernaut of an Ohio State team,
that got screwed over by Florida State in the polls, would’ve
beaten these Vols.
5) 1996 Florida. Merry Christmas, Spurrier. The only way the
Gators were able to win the national title was because it got a
rematch against a Florida State team that won the first time
around, and got help from Arizona State losing in the last
minute to Ohio State in the Rose Bowl.
So, we’ve heard a lot about the “Poor Man’s” Vince Young.
One, Troy Smith won the Heisman. Another, Dixon may win it this
year. Vince Young, the prototype, never won the award himself,
but put his team on his shoulders and beat a team with two
Heisman winners. Do you think it’s possible that Reggie Bush
will be stripped of his Heisman and it will be given to Vince?
Any other year that guy would have been the best by far. –
JR
A: Is that really how you want Vince Young to get the Heisman?
Would all the great things Bush did on the field and all
the memories of that Heisman season go away by giving Young the
trophy? I’m still angry at myself for not going with my gut and
voting Bush over Young, but I hate the idea of taking away
awards and records for something silly like a player getting
money. USC didn't win a national title, and Reggie Bush didn't
win a Heisman because of money. If you’re talking about steroids
or stealing signals by a hidden camera, then I could understand.
If Young wanted a Heisman, he could’ve stayed for his senior
year. As it turns out, he joins Tommie Frazier and Jim Brown as
the greatest college players who’ve never won the Heisman.
Any chance the Big XII gets three in the BCS games? I assume
that for this to happen Kansas would have to finish 11-1 (with a
loss to Mizzou) with Mizzou winning out (and beating Oklahoma in
the title game) and Oklahoma winning out (and then losing to
Mizzou in the title game). – Mark
A: No. There’s a rule that only two teams from the same
conference can play in the BCS. Remember last year when
Wisconsin should’ve been able to go, but couldn’t because Ohio
State and Michigan were in? The rule is in place so no one
conference makes all the coin, but it’s ridiculous. The top ten
teams in the BCS standings should be the ones who get in
regardless of conference tie ins.
While everyone spends hours debating playoffs vs. BCS, why
doesn’t anyone mention the ridiculous nature of pre-season
polls? Here is an idea, how about we let the teams actually
play a game (or four) before the “experts” tell us who is good
this year. Let ‘em play before they tell us how great Wisconsin,
Tennessee, Nebraska and Louisville are. – TN
A: The only problem with the preseason polls is that they don’t
change much. If the preseason polls, for example, have USC 1,
Ohio State 2 and LSU 3, and let’s say someone like Oklahoma
obliterates everything in its path while the Trojans, Buckeyes
and Tigers are merely average and just barely get by, the
Sooners still wouldn’t move up to one because pollsters don’t
like to change from their preconceived notions. Someone will
always do a preseason poll, and that’s fine as long the
pollsters take what’s happening on the field into account and
adapt and adjust accordingly as the season goes on. Don't hate
the polls, hate the pollsters.
Is Kansas really that good? – CM
A: Yeah, to a point. It wouldn’t go unbeaten if it played in the
SEC, and it hasn’t beaten anyone of note, but it doesn’t screw
up, gets phenomenal plays from the lines, and executes with
stunning efficiency. Talent-wise, it should get wiped off the
map by a LSU, Oklahoma or USC, but as Boise State showed, that
doesn’t mean anything. This is a great team, and if it
wins at Oklahoma State, beats Missouri, and beats Oklahoma in
the Big 12 title game, the it’ll have its signature wins, and
considering this wild and wacky year, would be an unbeaten BCS
conference team deserving of playing for the whole ball of wax.
I don’t think this is a better team than LSU, but I’d give it an
even shot against Oregon on a neutral field. If they finish
unbeaten, then yeah, put them in the national championship.
Are we at the point where being undefeated or a one-loss team
has no intrinsic value? Kansas is undefeated and number 4 in
the BCS, and they haven’t beaten anybody of note. Granted it’s
not their fault that the Big XII North is way down, but their
non-conference schedule had Central Michigan, SE La., Toledo,
and FIU (ha!). UCONN is in the top 20 at 8-1, and their
non-conference schedule includes Temple, Akron, Maine, and
Duke. Will voters ever penalize these teams for their
fraudulent records, and consequentially return us to the days of
meaningful non-conference games? Ya know, the days when
Tennessee - Cal would have been just a nice game, and not ABC's
crown jewel of September? – Chris
A: That’s why I continue to scream that the strength of schedule
needs to be the number one factor in the BCS formula. While it’s
a plus to play a light schedule since you’ll at least be in the
discussion, like Kansas is now, there’s usually a ceiling on how
high you can go, and if you're a fraud with a great record
because of a bad schedule, you'll eventually get exposed. It
took KU being unbeaten to get to where it is now, and as soon as
it gets a loss, if it gets a loss, then you’ll see a
mega-tumble. An example of the other side is Oregon, who
announced it was in for a big season by blasting Michigan early
on when everyone was watching, and things rolled from there.
Here’s my rule of thumb for non-conference schedules. If you’re
elite, like USC, Ohio State or LSU, you play anyone, anywhere,
any time. If you’re a top 25 team, you play one good
non-conference schedule and a bunch of cupcakes. If you’re a
historically mediocre BCS program, you play all cupcakes to get
a base of wins for a possible bowl game.
My friends and I argue constantly about which conference is
better, the Big 12 or the SEC. How would you breakdown a
comparison of the Big 12 and the SEC, top-to-bottom playing on a
neutral field? - Chris (Shawnee, OK)
A: As you wish (but I get to create the matchups) …
1. LSU vs. Oklahoma … LSU
2. Georgia vs. Kansas … Kansas
3. Florida vs. Texas … Florida
4. Auburn vs. Missouri … Missouri
5. Tennessee vs. Oklahoma State … Tennessee
6. Alabama vs. Texas Tech … Alabama
7. Arkansas vs. Kansas State … Arkansas
8. South Carolina vs. Texas A&M … South Carolina
9. Kentucky vs. Colorado … Kentucky
10. Mississippi State vs. Nebraska … Mississippi State
11. Vanderbilt vs. Iowa State … Vanderbilt
12. Ole Miss vs. Baylor … Ole Miss
It’s all my opinion, but I’d be shocked if it wasn’t an SEC
slaughter. It might not be 10-2, but I doubt it’d be far off.