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.)
First of all, I
apologize for not doing more of these lately. I’ve been swamped
this year, and unfortunately, this is the column that takes the
hit. I’ll try to do these on a more regular basis, and in a few
weeks, I’ll be doing a live chat on Thursday afternoons, so if
you have a chance, blow off work (assuming we all still have
jobs by then) and check it out.
The way I see it the
top ten spots in the polls are occupied by just a handful of different
teams every year. My question is, can any other school become a
football factory or is the limit reached. Is there any way, say, a
Purdue could hire the right people recruit the right kids to compete
every year for a Big 10 championship and occasionally play for a NC?
How did these football factories like Texas, Florida, Ohio State get to
be that way?
- ScottyA
A: Sure, but it takes a little while to sustain that high level, and
remember, those programs like Texas, Florida, and Ohio State have had
some down periods, too. Oklahoma was a disaster for several years until
Bob Stoops took over. LSU was a perennial also-ran until Nick Saban and
Les Miles turned things around. Penn State had a few losing seasons
before getting night-and-day better over the last few years, USC was
mediocre until Pete Carroll turned into a god, and on, and on, and on.
So yes, it is possible, but it’s harder at a place like Purdue that
might be a bit smaller, doesn’t necessarily have the fan base, and
doesn’t have a great recruiting base to deal with as opposed to a
program that owns a state name like Wisconsin or Illinois. The key is
maintenance. Missouri is fantastic now, but what happens when Chase
Daniel is done? Is Mizzou like Purdue when Drew Brees was flinging it
around? It’s one thing to be good for a few years, but it’s really,
really hard to maintain a high level.
The factories got to be factories by winning early, winning often, and
building and building to the point where college football became part of
the fabric of the school. However, this didn’t always work. Minnesota
was a college football powerhouse over the first half of the century,
but a few down years kicked in and the program never ascended back to
its national title level. Meanwhile, a place like Florida is the big
school in a football mad state. It can’t help but be good. There needs
to be an element of luck, the right coach, as you mentioned, and the
right timing, and the right recruiting base. That’s how Miami and
Florida State got to be special, and that’s why many thing South Florida
could be that sort of next-big-thing program.
So we're about halfway
through the season, and Paul Johnson has his offense running pretty dang
well. It's no world-beater yet, but considering he's using players
recruited for a standard offense and had to do an overhaul, it appears
he's a fantastic fit at Georgia Tech and good times are coming. Also
consider that aside from our D-line, we're playing mostly freshmen and
sophomores. Help me put a cap on my expectations. How bright is Tech's
future right now?
– Casey
Alright. Kind a like boxing has the best Pound for Pound fighter in
the world, considering the program, who's the best Pound for Pound head
coach? - JF
A: Add to the fact that no coach in America has any interest in playing
against Georgia Tech. You just can’t properly prepare for the speed and
precision of the option offense like Johnson runs it. What he was able
to do at Navy is miraculous, only a few of those players are legit D-I
talents. Now he’ll get the right guys to fit his system, and all of a
sudden, everyone will realize that there really is a place for this type
of attack. Since no one else is really doing it, and no team can
properly practice for it, yeah, let your expectations run wild. Now
here’s the real trick; can Johnson get a spread-star type of quarterback
to buy into his system? The problem with what Johnson is doing is that
it’ll be impossible to get a pro-caliber quarterback to step in.
However, can Johnson convince a Terrelle Pryor or Tim Tebow type to run
the option as opposed to the spread? This will be one of the nation’s
most fun teams to watch over the next few years.
To answer the second question, Johnson probably tops my list for the
best pound for pound head men (and I promise, no cranks about Mark
Mangino or Charlie Weis). Right now, my personal top coaches based on
what they're doing with their programs and their talent level (as
opposed to Pete Carroll or Urban Meyer, who'd probably be at the top of
my list overall) would probably be 1) Johnson, 2) Jim Grobe, Wake
Forest, 3) Bobby Johnson, Vanderbilt, 4) Todd Graham, Tulsa, 5) Troy
Calhoun, Air Force
The Rose Bowl is bound to lose at least one Pac-10/Big Ten team. Do you
think that they learned their lesson last year? That is, if USC goes to
Miami, and OSU is 11-1 and in the Rose Bowl, will the committee still
pick a two loss overmatched Pac-10 team over a much more qualified one
loss LSU/Alabama/Florida/Georgia/Oklahoma/Missouri??? – AW
A: Never. If there’s a chance to do the Big Ten vs. the Pac 10 in the
Rose Bowl, the Rose Bowl will do it. You and I might have desperately
wanted to see Georgia play USC in Pasadena last year, but the Rose Bowl,
ABC, and Joe Six-Pack wants his beer cold, his TV loud, and Big Ten vs.
Pac 10 on New Year’s Day. It doesn’t matter to the powers-that-be
whether or not the game is special on the field. Everyone watches, it
gets the highest ratings of all the non-national title bowls by a long
shot, the fan bases always pack the house, and yeah, it is the most
special of all the bowl games. However, and here’s the curve ball, in
today’s market and with money and travel tight, the Rose Bowl will do
whatever it can to make money. If that means bringing in an SEC team
that’ll pack the house with everyone who can travel, as opposed to
Illinois, who might not bring the same fans a second year in a row if it
against USC, it’ll do it.
Alright, I’ve heard you on the radio hinting at it over and over again.
Do you REALLY think Ohio State has a shot to play for the national
title? Don’t ruin my day. Tell me this joke of a program is done! –
CJL
A: The issue is perception. As Terrelle Pryor gets better and
better and if Beanie Wells keeps cranking out big games, there will be
an underground movement that’ll notice how much different this team is
from the one that got thumped by USC. Currently ranked 11th,
as long as the Buckeyes keep winning, they’ll start moving up and up and
up. The key now is October 25th. If you’re a Buckeye fan, you
need Penn State to continue to be a monster. You need a 219-3 Nittany
Lion win over Wisconsin to make that showdown that much bigger.
Settle this debate I’m having with my co-worker. Forgetting about
actually winning the national title, which carries more prestige,
getting to the college basketball Final Four or getting into the BCS
(not the BCS title game)? – JB
A: My knee-jerk reaction initially was the BCS, but now, I’ll go
with the extremely boring, it depends. Getting to a BCS game is tougher,
you have to win ten-plus games as opposed to getting hot for four games
and getting to go shoot hoops in a dome somewhere. Upon further review,
I’d say in our current sports world, getting into the Final Four carries
more prestige, but that quickly falls off the map when it comes to the
title game. College basketball coaches are measured by the number of
Final Fours they get to. People hate the BCS so they tend to dismiss how
hard it is to get there.
Want to make some money? Ask a regular guy in a bar what happened in
last year’s college football championship game. He’ll remember Ohio
State and then he’ll punch you in the store. Then, ask him who won the
last two college basketball national titles, and for a drink, ask for
the loser. Trust me on this; no one outside of Lawrence, Kansas or
Memphis, Tennessee will get the answer in less than three minutes, if at
all. No one ever, ever remembers the college basketball national
title losers.
Given the apparent strength of the Mountain West and the fact that the
WAC looks pretty weak overall, shouldn't a once beaten BYU, Utah, or TCU
get a BCS berth over an undefeated Boise State? – Dave
A: No. If you’re talking about a playoff spot, then yes, strength of
schedule would then mean something. The BCS games, outside of the
national title, are just better paying, higher profile bowl games. Boise
State has earned its stripes with the win over Oklahoma a few years ago
and with a bombing of Oregon this year in Autzen Stadium. If you’re
asking about a one-loss BYU vs. an unbeaten Ball State, then yeah, the
Cougars probably deserve to be in.
What can be done to change up the current typical bowl selections. I am
a mountain west fan and feel that the past few years the bowl matchups
have been boring, and it seems like nothing new to play a pac 10 team in
the Las Vegas Bowl (as if the mountain west does not play enough pac 10
teams throughout the season.) I've seen MAC teams and Conference USA
teams play better teams in their bowl games then the mountain west. Is
it possible to get a mountain west bowl overhaul. – Jake
A: The problem is the Las Vegas Bowl. The Mountain West’s No. 1 team
deserves a New Year’s Day spot, like in the Gator Bowl. The Las Vegas
Bowl provides a nice matchup, and yeah, who doesn’t want to go to Vegas
over Jacksonville, but it’s just not on the national map. The other
problem is the Mountain West itself. This year the league is solid, but
you’re not going to get the needle moving on a national scale by putting
TCU in a high-profile bowl. Good luck trying to find ratings for New
Mexico. I’m a believer that all the conference champions deserve the
biggest spotlight games, and then let everyone else fight it out for
spots.
One reader fired off with several questions (below) and they’re all
pretty interesting. I went with them in rapid-fire format.
1.) How many games do you watch each week and those that you watch tape
delayed do you fast forward through the huddles or listen to the
commentary?
A: I do a little of everything. I always have a game on somehow, and
I’ve perfected the art of listening to a game while working. I have a
SlingBox so one game can be on my computer, and the biggest of the three
TVs I have rolling is in my direct sight-line when I look up from the
computer.
2.) I once had the
pleasure of meeting Michael Medved, a professional film critic, who
admitted that seeing so many movies removed the thrill of watching a
movie that the average person gets. He did say that the rare gem was
still enjoyable. Do you find that watching so many games becomes a
burden rather than it being enjoyable?
A: It’s
still enjoyable, but watching a game isn’t an escape for me like it is
for the average fan. My life is like one big 24/7 pregame show, so I do
want to see how all the analysis we do holds up. I’m always interested
in putting all the pieces of the puzzle together. I’d almost take it a
different way. I watch so much sports and so much college football, that
I’m always appreciative if a good game. But if a game is becoming a
blowout, However, I have a hard time giving a hoot about any non-college
football game that I’m not directly involved in, like fantasy football.
3.) What is the cause
of the overwhelming majority of fans thinking the world is biased
against their team?
A: Ignorance
and fact. All bias comes from ignorance, and if all you care about, all
you read about, and all you analyze is your own team, you’re not going
to know about anyone else and you’ll have a skewed view of life.. And
yes, the rest of the world is biased against your team. As the
t-shirt says, Your Favorite Band Sucks. The same goes for your favorite
team, and basically everything else you like.
4.) What is the cause
of the overwhelming majority of fans thinking their team is
underachieving? If you could somehow condense each team's fan base into
a single opinion about whether their team has met expectations over the
past 5 years, instead of a split between under/overachieving I bet 100
out of 119 team's fan bases would say they have underachieved.
A: Fans know
their teams and they know what these teams are capable of. If USC plays
for the ownership of the world and a bag of Doritos, it beats Oregon
State by three scores. Clemson is certainly better than it’s been
playing.
5.) How would a playoff
impact the regular season including scheduling matchups, intensity,
other things the average fan would not think of?
A: It would
make the regular season even better. If you’re, say, Oklahoma, and you
know that you’re in the playoffs if you have to win the Big 12 title to
get in, then there’s no reason not to schedule that interesting
non-conference matchup. If you went with my plan of taking the six
current BCS champions, put the best non-BCS team in one of the spots,
and allowed one at-large bid
6.) Which teams do you
think are better suited for a playoff rather than trying to run the
gauntlet in the regular season and why?
– SB
A: Uhhhh, there isn't a playoff. I get your point, but it all depends on
the format. A plus-one? A 16-team free-for-all? What woudl itbe? Like
all college football games, the team with the better offensive lines
would do the best job. You can mask mediocre talents if the front five
is crushing and killing. I’d prefer the battle-hardened teams like an
SEC champion or a Big Ten champion over the Big East or ACC champions in
a playoff, if there was one. Also, in a really, really big game, go with
the better quarterback.