The great debate, more mail (cont.)

The Chick-fil-A Kickoff Classic premiered in 2008 with Alabama-Clemson and has already become a mainstay. Bob Rosato/SI

I'm tired of hearing you whine about the Crush. Be a grown up and make a decision. If you decide to do it, I vote Jill Flint from Royal Pains. The pick goes against the current blonde trend, which gives us some variety. It also gives us someone who is obscure and off the radar.
-- Chad, Arlington, Va.

Chad, Chad, Chad. What you call "whining," I call "taking my sweet-ass time so as not to screw this thing up."

But you should know lots and lots of other people share your tastes. Since last week, I've received more than 250 Crush nominees in my Inbox -- quite possibly every name of every attractive actress on every television show or obscure movie currently in rotation -- but this Jill Flint woman got as many mentions as anyone. I must confess, I've never seen Royal Pains (though I hear SI's own Brooklyn Decker recently made an appearance), nor did I have any idea how many people watch USA (there were also numerous nominations from Pysch and Burn Notice, neither of which I've seen, either).

So two things are now abundantly clear: Yes, there will be another Celebrity Crush (I can hear the champagne corks popping now), and it seems I'm going to have to do two types of scouting this preseason.

Given the success of the Chick-fil-A Kickoff Classic in Atlanta, do you foresee another corporation/city joining forces to create another great nonconference matchup in a different region of the country?
-- Jack Murphy, Taipei, Taiwan

You have to give major props to Gary Stokan, Chick-fil-A Bowl president and Atlanta sports czar, for turning that event into a mainstay so quickly. (If you didn't hear, LSU and North Carolina have signed on for next season.) However, Atlanta is unique in that it is the rare major city in which college teams still rule supreme over the pros, and its location as the unofficial hub of the South makes it an ideal destination for fans throughout the SEC and ACC. There aren't too many other cities that could sell out a 70,000-seat stadium without a true home team (Georgia or Georgia Tech) involved.

Dallas, however, is another possibility. Cowboys owners Jerry Jones has already scheduled numerous college games at the new Cowboys Stadium, starting with this year's Oklahoma-BYU opener. Arkansas and Texas A&M have scheduled a 10-year series there, and the Cotton Bowl game is moving there as well. Depending on the success of the OU-BYU game (it's already a near-sellout, with a projected 15,000 BYU fans coming to town), perhaps Cotton Bowl sponsor AT&T could be talked into turning the game into an annual event. It might be tough, though, because it would probably have to include a Big 12 South school every year to make it feasible, and those teams aren't itching to give up home games.

Other than that, I think you can expect to see more neutral-site "one-offs" around the country. Notre Dame is scheduling near-annual neutral site games now, including against Army at the new Yankee Stadium next year. Army has announced it will play future games there against Boston College, Rutgers and Air Force, though those matchups might hold limited national appeal. Ditto the discussed Wrigley Field game between Northwestern and Illinois. For the most part, however, it's a difficult challenge convincing major programs to both schedule tough nonconference games and give up home games in the process.

Speaking of tough schedules ...

Since 2000, what team has played Miami twice, Colorado, Michigan, Ohio State twice, Notre Dame twice, Oklahoma twice, Fresno State, Air Force, Syracuse, Boise State, BYU and is scheduled to play LSU this year? The University of Washington. Not that I agree with their scheduling -- the team hasn't been good since Slick Rick won the Rose Bowl -- but at least they don't hide from competition.
-- David Shemaria, Philadelphia

David sent this in response to last week's query about which school most consistently schedules tough nonconference opponents. I have to agree Washington ranks right up there with USC. Colorado isn't far behind, but gets docked a tad for the presence of I-AA foes in '06 and '08. According to Wiz of Odds, USC and Washington are two of just four schools that have never scheduled a I-AA opponent. The others are UCLA and Notre Dame.

I am really puzzled by this latest Rose Bowl selection change. Why would the Rose Bowl accept this constraint when the other BCS bowls have not? I am not buying they did it for the good of the BCS organization.
-- Kenneth, Cincinnati

You can be sure it wasn't the Rose Bowl's idea, and that no one in the Tournament of Roses, Big Ten or Pac-10 is doing cartwheels at the thought of Utah or Boise State taking away a spot that would have otherwise gone to one of those league's teams. (You just know it will happen in a year Cal finishes in the top five.) But the Rose didn't have a choice. Officials from the other BCS bowls have been furious for some time that the Rose Bowl essentially gets to play by its own set of rules.

Since the Rose is the only BCS bowl with two conference partners, it is the only bowl that never has lower than second pick of at-large choices and therefore could never get "stuck" with a non-BCS team. (The Sugar Bowl last year was the first game to voluntarily take such a team, picking Utah over Cincinnati with the second-to-last choice.) So yes, this was done for the "good of the BCS," though it wasn't done to appease the Coalition schools (as most media reports made it out to be) as much as to pacify the Fiesta, Sugar and Orange bowls.

I did find it interesting timing that Jim Delany chose last week to announce this "news," which was quietly agreed to years ago. It's no coincidence the whole Orrin Hatch/Utah stink took place just a few weeks earlier. I also find it amusing not even the beneficiaries seem all that pleased about it. While in Utah last week for an upcoming story, I heard some local sports radio hosts discussing Delany's comments, and their response was essentially "thanks for nothing." While I understand fans of schools like Utah want equal postseason access, not little handouts, the first time one of their schools gets invited to Pasadena, they might as well shut out the lights back home because the entire campus will be making that trip.

With everyone hyping Ole Miss, Alabama and LSU in the SEC West, do you think Auburn will sneak up on some teams with Gus Malzahn's offense?
-- @Sregit (via Twitter)

I honestly have no idea what to make of Auburn. On the one hand, I have a lot of respect for offensive coordinator Gus Malzahn, who helped Arkansas win the division in 2006 and lit up scoreboards at Tulsa the past two years. On the other hand -- you saw Auburn's offense last year. It seemed at times the Tigers were literally trying to move backward. Obviously, the staff had as much to do with it as the players (Tommy Tuberville's old-guard staff neither embraced new coordinator Tony Franklin's spread offense, nor learned how to teach it to the players), but you don't finish 104th in total offense without some serious holes.

The hope on The Plains is previously forgotten quarterback Neil Caudle, who shined in the spring game, will beat out 2008 duds Kodi Burns and Chris Todd, and that the offense will morph into Tulsa-lite. The more realistic goal for this season is Auburn will at least cut down on the amount of mistakes it made last year, run the ball more effectively and not force the defense -- which should remain stout under respected coordinator Ted Roof -- to spend the whole day on the field. I could definitely see Auburn getting back above .500, but the Tigers will still be a step or two behind Alabama/LSU/Ole Miss. That team is not a one-year fix.

You don't mention the Celebrity Crush for a week and you get flooded with Mailbag letters? For real? How insecure are these people that they need their own attractions to be validated by a sportswriter? How old are these people? Thirteen? Fourteen? Disgusting.
-- J.J., Milwaukee

Hey, now. Say what you want about me (plenty of people have), but I will NOT stand by and let someone insult my readers like that.

Numerous unpublished studies have shown Mailbag readers tend to be smart, sophisticated, highly discerning individuals. Researchers are still trying to figure out why it is they come here.