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.)
When the Big East expanded why weren't they interested in
Memphis? It seems like if they took Cincy and Louisville that
Memphis would have to go there too. – Kvn
Should the Big East expand? Are there any programs left to go
after? - CL
A: Memphis might be in soon to figure out a way to get the
basketball program in the league mix. There’s no question that
the Big East would like to expand a bit to get bigger and more
prominent, but it will only happen if it can figure out a way to
get up to 12 teams to be able to pull in the revenue from a
championship game. The problem would be finding the four teams
to make it happen, and making geographic sense. Obviously Notre
Dame would be the big prize, and it would be easy considering
the basketball tie-in, but the Big Ten would likely take the
Irish first, if it’s possible. I have no inside knowledge and am
merely speculating here, but my guess for the four teams would
be all from Conference USA: East Carolina, UCF, Memphis, and
then either Southern Miss or Marshall.
From: Department of Getting Waaay Ahead Yourself
Subject: Kirston Pittman, LSU, DE
Situation: He's already played on two BCS title teams
(2004,2008). He's just been granted a sixth year of eligibility
due to extended injuries by the NaziAA.
Question: If, If, If LSU were to win another BCS title in '09,
has there been another player to play on 3 National Title teams? – CobraJet
A: Johnny Lujack was the starting quarterback for three national
champion Notre Dame teams, but they were spread out. After
winning the 1943 national title, he went off to the Navy during
World War II. He came back to lead the way to championships in
1946 and 1947. I’m sure there more than I was able to find, and
the key is to start with teams that won three national titles
over four or five years. Look at the 1994 Nebraska roster and
find the freshmen and you’ll have players on three title teams,
most notably Grant Wistrom and Joel Makovicka. Army won three
national championships from 1944 to 1946 thanks to Glenn Davis
and Doc Blanchard.
Stoops is a good regular season coach, but why can't he ever
win a bowl game? Is he over paid? – JS
A: I continue to get angry e-mails about Bob Stoops meaning the
message isn’t getting through. It’s not like I’m friends with
the guy or anything, and he hardly needs me to stand up for him,
but he’s become the example of what unrealistic expectations can
bring.
Over the past eight years, no one, and this includes LSU and USC,
has the résumé Oklahoma has. 2000 season: national championship.
2001, 11-2 with a Cotton Bowl win. 2002, a Big 12 title with a
Rose Bowl win over Washington State. 2003, a loss to LSU in the
national championship. 2004, a Big 12 title with a loss to USC
in the national championship. 2005, Holiday Bowl win over a 10-1
Oregon team that thought it should be in the BCS. 2006, Big 12
title with a Fiesta Bowl loss to Boise State. 2007, Big 12 title
with a Fiesta Bowl loss to West Virginia. 91-17, five Big 12
championships, one national title, and appearances in two other
championship games. I think the program lost its badass mojo
once Mike Stoops left for Arizona, but remember, USC hasn’t won
a national title since Norm Chow took off and no one’s calling
for Pete Carroll’s head.
I’m already missing football season and looking back, was
there a better game all year than LSU-Florida? What was your top
game of the season? – shelt
A: How about most of the SEC season overall? This was the most
fun, wild season I can ever remember, and picking a top game is
tough. I have to go with the Kentucky 43-37, three overtime win
over LSU, with the LSU 30-24 win over Auburn a close second.
Again, though, this was hard. Take your pick of about 25 great
games this year and you probably have the best one.
As a Michigan State Alum, I hate
Michigan. Is this the year when the skunk bears finally have a
losing season for the first time since 1967? Also, will this be
the first year since 1990 I can go to A2 and watch the Spartans
win in the quiet house? Sparty On!
- Billy McSTATE
A: Maybe on getting the win, considering the Spartans have been
this close for so many years, and now there are major
question marks on offense, no on the losing season. There aren’t
any sure things after Appalachian State, but assume wins over
Miami University, Toledo, at Minnesota and Northwestern. That’s
four right there. Even if the Wolverines stink, figure they’ll
win at least two at home against Utah, Wisconsin, Illinois, and
Michigan State (sorry), and assume they’ll win at least once at
Notre Dame, Penn State and Purdue. Again, that’s assuming things
go in the tank, relatively speaking. No, I’m not assuming a win
in Columbus.
In the 2/1 Ask CFN you mention that you are "against
athletic scholarships altogether." Why? – BW
A: It takes away from a school being an academic institution.
I’m for players being allowed to have agents, do endorsements,
get $100 handshakes from boosters, be able to leave whenever
they want to for the pros, and be able to make money however
they can away from the field, but if this is truly about being
COLLEGE football, and college athletics in general, then these
should, at least in my pie-in-the-sky theory, be students
representing the universities. I know these players make tens of
millions of dollars for the schools, but that’s why they should
be able to benefit in other ways. As Apollo Creed would say,
scholarships should be for the thinkers, not the stinkers.
How has the transformation from an amateur sport into a
multi-million-dollar business changed college
football: individual college's program objectives, the coaching
objectives, player character, fan expectations and the overall
character of the game? Perhaps more succinctly: what was the
game's purpose 50 years ago, and what is its purpose now? Is it
a student sport in name only, i.e. has it become a
wolfish professional sport dressed in sheepish student attire?
Are we just kidding ourselves thinking we're watching college
students play an amateur sport? Should we admit that, like
professional football, college ball has become a commercial
enterprise wherein Polly-Anna notions of scholarship,
sportsmanship, morality and character building come in second to
profits? If I want my son to be a good man first and a rich man
second, do I even want him playing college football? – AH
A: There are several things at play in your questioning. First
of all, there’s a common misconception about the good old days
of college football. Yes, it might seem like the sport has lost
its soul with all the money flowing through it, treating high
school prospects like professionals, the BCS, and all the other
relatively new aspects of the sport, but when it comes to
cheating, such as paying off players, booster involvement,
unscrupulous coaches, and things that today would be considered
death penalty worthy violations, things used to be much, much
worse.
Second, and this is the part that most don’t know, as big as
college football is now, relatively speaking, it was even bigger
back in the first half of the 20th century. Remember,
the NFL wasn’t any big deal until around the mid-60s, so for a
long, long time, baseball was truly the national pastime, and
college football was second.
To answer your main question about the purpose compared to 50
years ago, it’s still roughly the same, except the biggest of
the big stars used their college football fame to go out and do
things in the real world, if they didn’t play pro ball, while
the top players now are obviously dreaming about the NFL.
Big-time college football has always served the purpose of
bringing attention to the schools and being a campus rallying
point.
90% of the players who don’t have next-level talent get it. They
might not be on their way to med school, but most understand
that their future is outside of pro ball, and as a plus, there
isn’t the academic cheating there was back in the day. Also
remember that there’s one huge, monster improvement in today’s
game: integration, which didn’t happen until around 1970, with a
few schools holding on even later than that. So to stop my
long-winded answer, just because the sport has changed in
several major ways, that doesn’t mean it’s gotten worse.
I am begging you to make a weekly column of hate mail that
you receive. I crack up when I read any that you post and I'm
sure there's some pretty funny stuff that you don't. Also, will
Bama win a national title in the next 3 years? – SH
A: Auburn rules, Julio Jones is overrated, Bear Bryant was a
total cheat, and Nick Saban has a hair out of place. I’ll post
those e-mails you want next week.
"Sleeping Giant" might be a poor choice of words, but
is the Big Ten on the verge of a serious turnaround? OSU will
likely continue to be perennial top-10 team. If Rich Rodriguez
could build team that did that to Oklahoma, it's scary to
think what he is capable of at Michigan.
Michigan State is on the upswing
with Dantonio, as is Illinois
with Zook. Wisconsin does not
appear to have experienced a drop-off from Alvarez to Bielema.
Perhaps most significantly, Penn State
could blow up after JoePa leaves if they hire the right guy to
exploit one of the biggest recruiting hotbeds in the country.
– Scott
A: I know it doesn’t seem like it, but the giant is more awake
than you think. SEC is the big king of the hill, but over the
last several years you could make a case for the Big Ten being
No. 2. Who’s been better? Don’t get hung up on USC, the elite of
the elite program going, beating up on the Big Ten in some
recent Rose Bowls, and it’s unfair to pound on the league
because Ohio State lost the last two national titles. The league
is just fine compared to everyone but the SEC. But yes, it could
be even better and does appear to be on the verge of doing a lot
more across the board.
