Brian Brohm has passed for 2,415 yards and 20 touchdowns, but Louisville has struggled in its first year under Steve Kragthorpe. Jim Owens/Icon SMI

MAILBAG Submit a question or an opinion to Stewart. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

Stewart, can you recall another team that has struggled through a coaching change as Louisville has this year? Honestly, I'm just looking for some perspective in what otherwise has been a totally bewildering experience. What happened?
--Ken Hardin, Louisville, Ky.

Not really. While it's not uncommon for coaches to experience a rough first season, that's usually because they're walking into a rebuilding situation. It would take someone who's been around longer than me to come up with an example of a coach who, like Steve Kragthorpe, was handed the keys to what most believed a ready-made title contender only to go out and immediately crash it into the neighbor's fence. The closest comparison I can think of is Ron Zook's 8-5 debut season at Florida, but even that's not necessarily apt, as the Gators still remained relatively competitive in the SEC (6-2) even if that wasn't up to the lofty standard set by predecessor Steve Spurrier. Unless the Cardinals' atrocious defense makes a dramatic turnaround very soon, it's hard to foresee Louisville, currently 3-3, even finishing above .500.

It's hard to blame the Cardinals' defensive implosion (they rank 99th nationally in yards allowed) solely on scheme or adjustment to a new coaching staff when the defensive coordinator, Mike Cassity, has not changed. It seems to me either, or both, the former and current staffs made some major recruiting mistakes on that side of the ball. "What bothers me is we're doing the same things on defense we've been doing here for a long time," Kragthorpe said this week. "Obviously, we're doing it with some different guys." Kragthorpe definitely recognized some deficiencies in those "different guys" upon his arrival, prompting him to bring in two last-minute juco imports, linebacker Willie Williams (the former Miami phenom) and cornerback Woodny Turenne. Unfortunately, Williams has already been kicked off the team, while Turenne has provided little help to a secondary that could desperately use it.

Kragthorpe and Cassity still have time to turn things around, but I wouldn't count on it happening this week at Cincinnati. Ben Mauk and the Bearcats run the same type of spread passing attack that Utah torched the Cards with last week -- only much better.

In light of your recent revelation that the word "upset" should be reserved for March Madness, don't you think you should change the name of your "Upset Special" pick in the Weekend Pickoff?
--Jason Stuart, Ozona, Texas

Stewart, In your Weekend Pickoff, you called your prediction of Tennessee over Georgia an "Upset Special." Should that game not be classified a "Surprise Special?" What next? Using "we" when referring to Northwestern?
--Rob, Shreveport, La.

Man -- I knew I was going to take some crap for that as soon as I sat down to write the Pickoff last Thursday. I probably should have thought before writing that Mailbag. However, seeing as the "Upset Special" has been a weekly fixture of mine since 2002, I figure it deserves to be grandfathered in. Since true "stunners" are, by definition, impossible to predict, you can pretty much assume my Upset Special (like that one) is almost always going to qualify as a "surprise" (like my Illinois-Penn State pick the week before) or a "weird one" (Tennessee beating Georgia by such a lopsided margin).

There was one other unintended consequence from last week's Mailbag.

Is it possible that you jinxed USC with your article quote about "stunners" in your last Mailbag??
--Bryan R., Safford, Ariz.

The quote he's referring to was the following "hypothetical" scenario: Jeez -- Baylor beat Oklahoma and Stanford beat USC on the same weekend? It's 'Stunner Saturday!'

Unfortunately, I cannot take credit for that prophetic line, because when I turned it in, it actually said "Washington State." It was my editor, Gennaro Filice, who suggested changing to Stanford because (and I'm paraphrasing here), "that would be more shocking if it ever happened." As it turns out, it was.

3 of 4