SI.com HomeA CNN Network SiteSI.com Home
Get an NFL Performer Jacket FREE!  Subscribe to SI Give the Gift of SI
  • PRINT PRINT
  • EMAIL EMAIL
  • RSS RSS
  • BOOKMARK SHARE
Posted: Wednesday July 2, 2008 12:52PM; Updated: Thursday July 3, 2008 9:57AM
Stewart Mandel Stewart Mandel >
COLLEGE FOOTBALL MAILBAG

College Football Mailbag (cont.)

Decrease font Decrease font
Enlarge font Enlarge font
Stewart Mandel's Mailbag
Submit a question or an opinion to Stewart.
Name:
Email:
Hometown:
Question:

There are some schools that benefit from being in talent-rich areas (Southern California, the states of Texas and Florida in particular). I am curious about two things: Which school in a "talent-poor" area (you could define that however you like) has done the best at still attracting top talent? And which school in a talent-rich area has underperformed in terms of attracting that talent?
-- John, Mercer Island, Wash.

I love the question, but since you didn't set any particular time parameters, I'm just going to assume we're talking primarily about teams' recent performances, i.e. the past five to 10 years.

For the first category, I'm going to go with West Virginia. There are generally almost no elite prospects in that state (Rivals.com listed just one four-star and one three-star player in the entire state last year), and the most fertile border state, Ohio, is generally dominated by a certain Big Ten juggernaut. Yet the Mountaineers have produced three straight 11-win seasons by casting a wide net and finding largely undiscovered gems such as Pat White (from Alabama), Steve Slaton (Pennsylvania), Noel Devine (Florida, though he was obviously well known) and Darius Reynaud (Louisiana).

For the second category, you've got to go with UCLA. You're talking about a highly recognizable program sitting smack dab in one of the deepest talent pools in the country that has barely been above .500 over the past nine seasons. I realize the Bruins' cross-town rival is cleaning up right now, but there should still be plenty to go around. Lately, however, Cal and Oregon have pulled as many or more elite California players as UCLA. We'll see if Rick Neuheisel puts an end to that.

Stewart, you referred to Colorado's Darrell Scott last week as an "elite skill player." What exactly is a "non-skill" player in the modern era of college football? Is a player like Glen Dorsey not skilled because he doesn't run post routes? Is Alex Boone un-skilled because he doesn't run end-arounds? I know I wouldn't want to try to do their jobs on national TV.
-- Matt, Toledo, Ohio

That's a great point, Matt, though I don't think it's relegated solely to the modern era. Technically, Dick Butkus and Ronnie Lott were not "skill" players, either. Does anyone want to argue they were unskilled?

It's just one of those silly football terms that caught on at some point and continues to get perpetuated. Along those same lines, have you noticed that every remotely mobile quarterback since Michael Vick has been dubbed a "running quarterback," even though most of them throw just as often as their "drop-back" counterparts? Coaches are always urging their players to spend more time in the "film room," even though film has long since been replaced by digitized video systems. And I've never understood why preseason practices are referred to as "fall camp" when they take place in August.

I'm sure we could come up with a whole list of these if we put our minds to it.

Over the past 10 or 15 years, which fan base has had the most fun team to watch? Put another way, if you could go back to 1998 and pick a team to root for, what team would have put the biggest smile on your face? USC and LSU come to mind, but you might not go for the obvious.
-- Colin Clark, Charlottesville, Va.

While it would be easy to pick a team like those, it's much more fun to be the fan of an underdog that experiences unprecedented success. With that in mind, I can't imagine a more fulfilling allegiance over the past 10-15 years than that of a Boise State. Imagine being a Broncos fan in 1998. You're only two years removed from competing in Division I-AA and your team is coming off consecutive losing seasons. You're hoping just to be able to hold your head above water in the bottom-barrel Big West.

The next thing you know, you're watching your boys win a conference championship (1999), move up to a new conference (the WAC, in 2001) and turn into that league's preeminent power (six straight titles), culminating in a BCS bowl appearance (the 2007 Fiesta Bowl) and victory over one of the sport's most prestigious programs (Oklahoma). I'd be pinching myself every morning.

Stewart, why do you think that Virginia Tech has struggled in bowl games the last several years? The Hokies have the talent and the coaching to win the games, but they seem to fall flat on their faces in the postseason. Are they just not taking these games seriously until it's too late?
-- Matt, Centreville, Va.

I assume you're referring largely to the Hokies' past two bowl games -- last year's Orange Bowl loss to Kansas and the 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl loss to Georgia. (Prior to that, they beat Louisville in the Gator Bowl and lost to an undefeated Auburn team in the Sugar Bowl). You need look no further than their anemic offense.

Bud Foster's defense is among the stingiest in the country year-in and year-out, but the past two Virginia Tech teams ranked 99th ('06) and 100th ('07) nationally in total offense. Fortunately, most ACC teams lately have been as bad or worse on that side of the ball, allowing the Hokies to win a combined 21 games over the past two seasons, but once you get to a bowl game (or play an elite non-conference foe like LSU last year), you're eventually going to run into a team you can't beat with 250 yards of offense. I'll be interested to see what improvement, if any, Tech's offense makes with QB Sean Glennon entering his third season at quarterback.

On average, which conference sends in the most mail to the Mailbag?
-- William McDonald, Soddy Daisy, Tenn.

It pretty much goes in the order you'd expect. I would estimate I get about two to three times more submissions from SEC fans than any other conference. The Big Ten is probably next, thanks largely to the high volumes from Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State, followed by the Big 12, ACC and Big East.

The Pac-10 submissions, meanwhile, are so minimal it's embarrassing. Perhaps the ascension of an Oregon Duck to Mailbag Crush will help change that.

 
1 2 3
  • PRINT PRINT
  • EMAIL EMAIL
  • RSS RSS
  • BOOKMARK SHARE
ADVERTISEMENT