Sobering truth about why Bowden kept coming back, more mail

PRINT EMAIL FACEBOOK DIGG TWITTER RSS SHARE

Even through a decade of decline, Bobby Bowden never wavered in his belief that things would turn around at Florida State. AP Readers bid Bowden farewell Many readers submitted their thoughts and appreciations for Bobby Bowden following Tuesday's retirement announcement. Here is a small sampling: "Coach Bowden was a class act all the way. As a loyal Husker Fan, I loved to play Florida State because you knew you were seeing the best. I'm sorry he didn't get the chance to retire at the top of his game, like his good friend Tom Osborne did, but the man earned the right to stay on as long as possible. I also tip my hat to those loyal FSU fans who stayed with coach Bowden to the end." -- Dan Scarborough, Hurst, Texas "I will miss Bobby Bowden. I always respected him as a coach and loved him as a man. He is a man of character and faith who truly directed his players by his example of being a good man himself. I even respected him after I drove to 'Nawlins and watched his boys thump my Buckeyes in the Sugar Bowl in 1998. There are very few coaches with that kind of genuine good character left." -- Larry Kuhn, Columbus, Ohio "The Florida State fans who wanted Bobby Bowden gone are idiots. Your head coach hasn't had a losing season since 1976 and you run him out of town?! A great portion of the Seminole fan base is under the delusion that Jimbo Fisher will return them to the glory days of the '90s, but no one will. Not even Urban Meyer can match that ridiculous streak of dominance. I pulled for Florida State BECAUSE OF Bobby Bowden. Now I hope they never win another game." -- J.D. Bolick, Denver, N.C. "I have been a Penn State and Florida State football fan for the last 25 years or so. At PSU we have had the great privilege of having coach Paterno, and FSU had the same sort of privilege with coach Bowden. FSU should be ashamed of the way it is treating this legend. I hope that the football program at FSU becomes nothing more than a middle-of-the-road program and that the top recruits go elsewhere." -- Jeff Stern, Union, N.J. "I'm 48 now and I remember watching the pregame show for a Texas game probably around 1979 or '80, and the network doing the game did a little sideline story on this guy down at FSU named Bowden. It was just at the cusp of what would become an incredible run. I remember thinking, "Isn't that nice -- now let's get on to the real football." Little did I know! It makes me feel old to think that I remember the beginning, and now am witnessing the end, of a legendary college football coaching career." -- Wright, Atlanta

So, anything going on this week we should discuss? I can't recall a more news-heavy week in 10 years on this beat.

Hey Stewart, don't you think Bobby Bowden should have gone off into the sunset 10 years ago when you first covered him? He was 70 at the time. By 70 most people have already been retired for 10-15 years. I do cherish Bowden and what he has meant for the betterment of college football, but he should not have endured the last 10 years.
-- Hilario Gonzalez, San Benito, Texas

I'll get into Bowden specifically in a second, but in general, football coaches tend to be wired a little differently than the rest of us. Coaching isn't just their vocation; it's their life. They don't work 9-5. They rarely take vacations. They don't worry about hitting a certain age and cashing in on their 401Ks. Fired coaches often put on the sunny spin that now they'll get to spend more time with their families, but by the start of the next season, they're itching to get back on a field. The only reason more 70-year-old coaches aren't roaming the sidelines is because few ever reach that level of job security.

Only Bowden can say what exactly kept bringing him back every year, but much of it probably falls along the lines of what I wrote above. If you're an 80-year-old football coach who's spent every autumn of your adult life on a sideline somewhere, I'd imagine it's almost impossible to envision doing anything else. This is particularly true for Bowden, who, as disturbing as this is to even broach, has openly admitted he worries for his own mortality. He watched his idol, Bear Bryant, pass away within months of retiring. His father, a banker, died from a heart attack less than a year after retiring. "After you retire, there's only one big event left," he's joked on numerous occasions. Now it doesn't sound quite so funny.

We all wish Bowden could have gone out on a better note, but I don't know when the right time would have been. Ten years ago, Bowden had no reason to retire. He had the cushiest gig in the country. His program was trucking along, yet he no longer had to do much of the heavy lifting. He was healthy, energetic and had no reason to believe things would change anytime soon. When the first cracks started to show during the Chris Rix era, Bowden, like the rest of us, assumed the 'Noles had merely hit a hiccup and would get things rolling again soon enough. Should he have heeded the signs and called it quits in, say, 2002? 2006? Who's to say?

Like Joe Paterno, Bowden never wavered in his belief that things would turn around. Unfortunately, they didn't. He wanted to go out on top, no matter how long it took to get back there. You can't fault him that desire. You could argue FSU should have let him make that decision, but the school also stood by him well past the point when things began deteriorating. You also can't fault FSU its desire to begin the next chapter.

Hi Stewart, one of the things I love about your columns is that you tell readers, especially those who root for "down" programs, to always remember that college football is cyclical. Yet, you seem to think it's impossible for Notre Dame to ever be "on top" again. Why are the Irish exempt from the cyclical nature of the sport?
-- Dan, Toronto

Regarding the Notre Dame program: Isn't the problem just that it has hired a bunch of mediocre coaches of late? It's not like Bob Davie or Tyrone Willingham left ND to have greater success elsewhere. Doesn't the fall and resurrection of schools like Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas and USC show that, with the right leadership, programs once left for dead can spring back to life?
-- Tom Geraghty, Charleston, W.Va.

I understand the comparison between Notre Dame and Alabama/Oklahoma/Texas/USC. They share similarly rich histories and national recognition. However, that's where the commonalities end. Notre Dame operates differently than all other former and current powerhouses, and while the school's commitment to maintaining its unique status is certainly admirable, it puts it at a significant disadvantage to those other schools. The sport has changed drastically over the past 20 years, but Notre Dame hasn't changed with it. That's where its "cycle" breaks.

Twenty years ago, the Irish were not alone among major independents, but by 1993, Florida State, Miami and Penn State had all joined conferences. Is it a coincidence that 1993 was also the last time Notre Dame came close to a national title? As I wrote Monday, today's blue-chip football prospects grow up watching certain conferences. Kids in Georgia and Louisiana dream of playing in the SEC. Kids in Texas dream of playing in the Big 12. Besides the South Side of Chicago and certain Midwestern Catholic conclaves, not a lot of kids today grow up specifically watching Notre Dame. So not only does the school have to recruit nationally, it has to sell prospects on why playing for Notre Dame is better than playing in a certain conference. Weis was able to sell Jimmy Clausen, Michael Floyd, et. al., on his pedigree as an NFL offensive Yoda, but I'm not sure what incentive he could offer to comparable defenders.

Fifteen years ago, Notre Dame's NBC deal truly was unique. It solidified the Irish as a true national program. But guess what? Today, pretty much every Florida/LSU/Ohio State/USC game is on national television, too. Heck, all but one Northwestern game this season was available in my New York City living room if I so desired. Chuck that one-time advantage out the window, too.

And then there are the academic restrictions. My friend John Walters, a Notre Dame alum, pointed out this week that the potential Heisman Trophy winner, Toby Gerhart, plays for Stanford. That's true. But Gerhart also plays for an 8-4 team. As I wrote earlier this season, today's Notre Dame's program is a lot closer to Stanford's than Southern Cal's. In fact, the Irish played about as well as they have all season against the Cardinal, and it was an evenly matched game. Notre Dame had too much talent to go 6-6 this season, and the blame for that falls squarely on Weis and his staff. But 8-4 was probably its logical ceiling. And 8-4 isn't good enough for most Irish fans.

Has Notre Dame flubbed its last three coaching hires? Absolutely. Notre Dame should never go 16-19 over a three-year period as it has under Weis. It needn't suffer regular five-win seasons like it did under Davie and Willingham. With the right coach, there's no reason the Irish can't win seven or eight games annually, and rise up to the 10-win, BCS-bowl level every three or four years. But it's unrealistic to think the Irish will stockpile elite players and finish in the top 10 every year like they did once upon a time.

In his article, Walters cites Alabama's long spat of mediocrity before hiring its home-run coach, Nick Saban, as a comparison to Notre Dame. But unlike Saban, Notre Dame's next coach can't sign 30-plus players knowing some won't qualify. He won't be able to land 95 percent of his roster from within the Southeast. That's why Alabama (and Florida, and Texas) will never stay down for long, and that's why coaches like Saban, Urban Meyer and Bob Stoops don't view the Notre Dame job with as much allure as its history would seem to warrant.