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.)
Pete, help me
out here. I know this is College FOOTBALL News, and I love my
Georgia Bulldogs as much as the next guy, but it is obvious you
have an interest in the NCAA Tournament. I have gotten into a
few debates recently with buddies/co-workers about the
significance of Mario Chalmers' shot to tie the Kansas/Memphis
game. No one agrees with me here, but I will argue until I'm
blue in the face that Chalmers drained the most clutch shot in
the history of basketball, college or pro. Christian Laettner's
shot was in the Elite Eight, so that one is out right away. The
more interesting comparisons are to Michael Jordan's shot that
beat Utah in 1998, John Paxson's that beat Phoenix in 1993, and
Magic Johnson's junior sky hook against Boston in 1987. None of
those occurred in a game seven, and that's my argument for
Chalmers. Lo Charles made his dunk vs. Phi Slamma Jamma in a
tie game. Chalmers was faced with the situation of "make this
shot, or lose the national championship." To me, it is the
equivalent of a buzzer beater in game seven of the NBA Finals.
Do you agree?
– David
A: No. The Chalmers shot was an all-timer to be sure, but it
didn’t win the game. Had KU lost in OT, the shot would’ve been
as important as the Jerry West half court bomb in game five of
the 1970 NBA Finals against the Knicks. Neither the Jordan shot
to beat Utah nor and the Paxson shot to beat Phoenix came in a
game seven; I refuse to believe either of those Bulls teams
would’ve lost a seventh game. The Lo Charles dunk wasn’t clutch;
it was opportunistic. What about the Keith Smart shot to give
Indiana the 1987 title over Syracuse?
I know it was a regional final, but I’ll still go with the
Laettner shot to beat Kentucky in 1992. The argument could be
made that Laettner also came up with a “make this shot or lose
the national championship” play, but Duke needed to beat Indiana
and Michigan while Kansas had to get through overtime.
The other qualification is the legendary status. Find 100 guys
in a sports bar tomorrow night and ask them about the Laettner
shot. 99 of them would have a story about where they were when
it happened. Ask the same 100 guys to 1) name who played in the
2008 national championship and 2) who hit the key shot to send
it to overtime, and maybe ten will answer both of them within a
reasonable time.
Assuming you must watch a lot of the games each week on TV -
please discuss what you think of the play-by-play and color
analysts that are out there. Who is bad, good, very good, off
the charts ..... – CD
A: I’ve always been a lone wolf when it comes to the announcers
I like. I love hearing Brent Musburger call a game, and he’s
great with Kirk Herbstreit, while Verne Lundquist is also high
on my list. Maybe it’s because they’ve been around forever and
sound like classic college football, and maybe it’s the
confidence they have after years of work, but they’re my
favorites. Of the new guys, Thom Brennaman and Charles Davis
have been solid on the Big Ten Network and Fox. I also really
like the GameDay guys doing weeknight games. As far as the guys
I can’t handle, Paul Maguire has always been at the top of my
list. He was better last year after being banished to the
sideline, but he fails to add anything.
I was wondering if you
had an opinion on why Pat Hill’s name, out of Fresno State, doesn’t come
up when big time coaching vacancies are open in BCS conferences?
– KK
A: He hasn’t actually won much of anything significant. Fresno State has
come up with a few good wins here and there over average BCS teams, but
where are all the WAC titles? He was hot several years ago but he didn’t
take the program to another level, and now he has cooled off. That might
change if this year’s team is as good as expected.
Had to vent this to someone...it seems that every year that goes by,
the '04 Auburn team seems more and more screwed. Your BCS projections
just reminded me how unfortunate that team was. Not only to sit
undefeated behind two other undefeated teams, that's the obvious part,
but to do it in 2004 instead of more recent years is now my new
torture. As you pointed out in your Championship Game prediction "it
will take a lot to keep the SEC champion out of the title game". If the
LSU and Florida titles had happened in '02 and '03, Auburn would have
walked into the title game, based simply on the results of the two
2-loss SEC teams winning the title. But, of course, it didn't happen
that way. Auburn didn't have the benefit of the precedent we have now
on which to judge the relative strengths of the contenders. – JD
A: In hindsight, yeah, the Tigers got screwed out of playing for the
national title, but they probably didn’t get as hosed as you think. The
big difference between the last two years and the Auburn season is that
2004 Auburn probably doesn’t beat 2004 USC.
I was reading CFN's "Way Early BCS Projections" and I noticed there
was no mention of a possible USC-Ohio State rematch in the Rose Bowl. I
realize the guess is that the winner of the 9/13 contest will probably
go unbeaten the rest of the way, BUT if neither one of these teams make
it to the title game, yet each goes on to win their respective
conferences, we'd have a rematch between the two, correct? I feel this
would be a bad thing for college football, but I was wondering what your
thoughts were. What would the national perception be? And more
importantly, how would the Rose Bowl/Big Ten/Pac 10 feel about it? –
MM
A: Yeah, there’s a chance to the two could meet in the Rose Bowl again
since they’ll automatically go if they each win their respective
conferences and don’t play for the national title. The Rose Bowl, Big
Ten, and Pac 10 would take that matchup in a heartbeat no matter what
happens on the 13th considering who they are.
Is it good for college football? I hate rematches, but it would be far
more competitive than last year’s debacle. At the end of the day,
remember, bowl games, outside of the BCS Championship, are glorified
exhibitions. If it’s USC vs. Ohio State in the Rose Bowl, fine. It’s not
that big a deal. If it’s USC vs. Ohio State in the BCS Championship,
then I have a big, big problem considering the issue was already
settled. The only way a rematch might be acceptable is if USC wins a
nail-biter and there’s some question about whether or not the Buckeyes
would win on a neutral field. Even then, I’ll be 100% anti-rematch if
that time comes.
As a life long Nebraska football fan i was extremely disappointed
with Callahan's 07 year. I think that the Huskers had losing seasons
because he [Callahan] changed the offense style to west-coast from their
old and very effective option-run. Do you think that might just be the
reason? – MR
A: No. I love the option and think there’s a place for it at the highest
levels of college football, but Callahan’s offense wasn’t the problem.
In fact, and most Nebraska fans don’t want to acknowledge this, but he
was on the right track. What’s to complain about when the offense
finishes ninth in the nation, seventh in passing, and averages 33.4
points per game? It wasn’t consistent, but it was starting to catch on
late. Callahan’s problem was defense; the Huskers finished 116th
in the nation in rushing D, 112th overall, and 114th
in scoring defense. That’s what Bo Pelini has to change and that’s his
first order of business. Don’t expect a major tinkering with the offense
right away; there are other problems to deal with first.
With New England Patriots getting a slap on the wrist for their video
taping scandal from the NFL, how do you think the NCAA would've handled
a similar situation? Does the NCAA's ridiculous or harsh punishments do
more to preserve the integrity of the game or are they as meaningless as
the NFL's punishment of Patriots? – MM
A: Interesting thought. If the NCAA got ticked off enough, it would’ve
stricken the affected game from the record books, take away
scholarships, and hit the offending school with some kind of probation.
To me, spying on opposing teams like the Patriots got nailed for is far
worse than any kind of $100 handshake, paying players, or any other
goofy reason the NCAA tags programs with probation. The Patriots got off
easy.
I know that Tim Tebow was awarded the the Heisman Trophy last year
and I believe Darren McFadden was the runner up, but what about Pat
White? I really thought he carried West Virginia through many crucial
moments when Steve Slaton was missing, or just did not have the game in
his heart. Pat White really carried the team on his shoulders, and there
was no doubt that he leads that team with poise and confidence. Tebow
was phenomenal with the numbers he put up, but Pat White singlehandly
won a lot of games for the Mountaineers, at least he should of been
runner up, don't you think?! -Matt, Malden, MA
A: I’m with you, and if you did the Heisman voting after the bowls, he
might have won, or else he would’ve finished No. 2. Look at what
happened to the finalists. Tebow lost to Michigan, Chase Daniel didn’t
do anything in the win over Arkansas, Colt Brennan was a grease spot
against Georgia, and Darren McFadden was mediocre against Missouri.
White should’ve been in the Heisman mix over the last few seasons,
especially last year, but he was banged up in two of the team’s biggest
games and West Virginia lost to South Florida and Pitt partly because of
it. I think he gets his due, finally, this year. As long as he’s
healthy, and as long as West Virginia is decent, he deserves to be a
finalist this year.