 |
| |
|
 |
 |
|||||||||||
|
Great expectations Buckeyes may be loaded, but repeat won't be easyPosted: Monday July 07, 2003 11:36 AM
With July fully upon us, the newsstands beginning to fill up with preview magazines and the start of practices just over a month away, it’s probably time to turn our attention here in ‘Bag land from the ACC/Big East shenanigans to the actual college football season at hand. So why not start at the top and answer a question that has been posed roughly 47,368 times, in various forms, since this column began in April. One that can be summed up with this recent submission from Brian Daily of Mt. Vernon, Ohio: I'm perplexed. Why is it in most of the preseason college football ratings Ohio State is not getting the respect that the Buckeyes have earned? I completely believe they are the team to beat again. Why do I seem to be alone with this thought? First off, let me just say that if Ohio State is indeed being slighted in the pre-preseason polls, I hadn’t noticed. I know the Buckeyes were No. 1 in SI.com’s post-spring Top 25 and no lower than second or third in the others I’ve seen (and why would you be looking at those anyway?) But the question of whether OSU can repeat as national champion is certainly a juicy one regardless, so let us discuss, shall we? First off, I’m a firm believer that unless severely depleted, the defending champ deserves to start out No. 1, and in the Buckeyes’ case, they’re hardly depleted -- all 11 starters back on offense and six on defense, plus All-America kicker Mike Nugent. I see the Buckeyes’ offense going from adequate to explosive this season. Craig Krenzel showed in the Fiesta Bowl that he can be a factor when asked, he has a bevy of quality receivers to throw to in Michael Jenkins, Chris Gamble and newcomer Santonio Holmes, and, oh yeah, there’s Maurice Clarett. The defense, meanwhile, may slip a notch without stalwarts Matt Wilhelm, Mike Doss and Donnie Nickey but will still be very strong. There’s plenty of young talent waiting in the wings. But just because a team deserves to start out No. 1 by no means guarantees they’ll end it there. Just ask Miami last year, Florida State in 2000 or any of the other national champs since 1995 who have failed to repeat. It’s asking a lot to get the kind of breaks necessary for a title run two years in a row, and OSU more than any other recent champ had a ton of them last season. On paper this team could be better than last year’s yet still lose a couple games just because this time the 4th-and-1 against Purdue falls incomplete, or the Cincinnati receiver doesn’t drop that catch in the end zone. So to sum up, is Ohio State still the team to beat? In my opinion, yes. Does that mean the Buckeyes will win another national championship? Realistically, probably not.
Hey, Stewart, do you think that the ACC finally will be a great conference with the two teams they’re adding? Or are conferences such as the SEC and Big Ten so solid we shouldn’t care who they take?
I think the ACC has the potential to reach the level of the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12, but it’s not there yet, at least not from a big-picture perspective. No question the ACC now boasts a “big three” -- Miami, Florida State and Virginia Tech -- that can go toe-to-toe with those of the other leagues (Oklahoma, Texas and Nebraska in the Big 12, Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State in the Big Ten, Alabama, Florida and Tennessee in the SEC). After that, though, you’re talking more about potential than proven commodities when it comes to programs like N.C. State, Maryland and Virginia. They simply lack the track record of an SEC with Georgia, Auburn and LSU, or the Big 12 with Kansas State, Colorado and Texas A&M. That said, these things are cyclical and who’s to say the ACC on an upward swing couldn’t eclipse the SEC on an off year? You know, like right now. Just think, if Miami and Virginia Tech were jumping ship this season, the ACC would probably boast six teams in the preseason top 20 (Miami, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Maryland and Virginia). The SEC could have as few as three (Georgia, Tennessee and Auburn).
I do not understand what value there is to a conference championship game like the ACC wants. I question if there is real fan interest in these games. Last year I went to the Big 12 championship game (Oklahoma vs. Colorado) at Reliant Stadium in Houston. There were a lot of empty seats. There was not enough interest even to fill the stadium.
It’s an excellent point and one I’ve tried to make to people who simply don’t believe me when I tell them the Big Ten and Pac-10 have almost no interest in holding a championship game. If you get the right matchup, great. But how many people are going to show up in Detroit or Indianapolis in December to watch Illinois play Purdue? Arizona State and Oregon in L.A.? Forget it. In the case of last year’s Big 12 game, the game was played 1,100 miles from Colorado’s campus, and there was no Texas team to draw the locals. So of course there were empty seats. It’s a concept that works for the SEC because almost all the schools are a short drive from Atlanta, have large alumni there, have rabid fan bases and boast long-standing, natural rivalries with the rest of the league. The ACC, like the Big 12, is trying to manufacture these conditions. Hope they don’t get caught with their pants down the first time they end up with Maryland-Georgia Tech in Charlotte.
Hi, I would like to know if you think the Purdue Boilermakers are underrated. I predict Purdue wins the Big Ten this year.
I’ll reserve judgment until the official preseason polls come out to decide whether they’re underrated but, yes, I definitely agree that Purdue is a dark horse for the Big Ten title. And I only say dark horse because, let’s face it, every pundit on the planet is going to pick Ohio State or Michigan, just like they do every year. Never mind that five other league teams have won at least a share of the title in just the past four years. As expected, the Boilers took their lumps in the immediate aftermath of the Drew Brees era, yet still managed to extend their streak of bowl seasons to six. Do you realize how unfathomable that sounded before Joe Tiller? This is also a team that led the Big Ten in both offense and defense last season yet managed to lose six games, all by a touchdown or less, before notching an impressive bowl win over Washington. Tiller finally seems to have confidence in Kyle Orton as his guy at quarterback, and with 18 returning starters, including standout receiver John Standeford, this could very well be his best team yet.
Stewart, do you think any credibility will be given to the NCAA's proposal of tying graduation percentages to postseason participation?
I respect the intent, but the cynic in me says it will have little to no effect once all is said and done. Like our government, the NCAA legislative process is such that by the time a proposal makes its way through the various committees and respective constituents it’s a highly watered-down version of the original. And, just like the nation’s telemarketers will surely adapt to the new “no-call” list and find a new way to do business, whatever reform the NCAA does institute the nation’s coaches will adapt to and find a way around it. Whatever lip service they may pay to academics, the bottom line is no one’s going to let them use it as an excuse to start losing more games.
Give me a realistic view of the likelihood that the ACC will raid the SEC for South Carolina. I've heard the talk from others, but until I hear it from you I'll wait to fill their spot with Louisville.
Of all the ridiculous-bordering-on-delusional possibilities that are being tossed around for a 12th ACC team -- Notre Dame, Florida, Kentucky, Penn State -- South Carolina is about the only realistic one, seeing as the Gamecocks are a former member and fit better geographically with the ACC than the SEC. However, they’d have to be nuts to turn their backs on the riches of the SEC (over $100 million shared among members this year) until they’ve at least had time to see how this new ACC plays out. Will they get their championship game? What kind of TV deal will they garner? If after a few years the ACC is looking as sweet as some are prophesizing, and if the SEC suffers any kind of decline, then and only then should S.C. think about jumping ship. As for Louisville, I think the Cardinals are more likely headed for the Big East. The ACC fashions itself as being above Louisville. Perhaps upon being rejected by Notre Dame and the like they may reconsider, but by then the Cards may be locked up by the Big East.
What's happening with Pac-10? Are they trying to expand? It seems if they wanted, the best bet is to go after Colorado State and BYU. What do you think?
Maybe their position will change one day, but as of right now the Pac-10 seems in no hurry to expand. They feel like there aren’t any programs in their region worth pursuing, and they’re probably right. Colorado State, Fresno State, Utah, Hawaii et al are certainly decent mid-majors but they hardly fit the profile of the league’s existing membership. The one semi-feasible possibility, at least from an athletic standpoint, would seem to be BYU. But to lift a quote from commissioner Thomas Hansen in the Orange County Register last week -- and before you send those e-mails, Cougar fans, I emphasize this comes from his mouth, not mine -- "Any prospective member has to be a major research university. BYU is not that." Thanks for the e-mails, folks, and also thanks to the many fraternity members who responded to last week’s call for tales of wacky hi-jinks. Unfortunately, after further consideration, I concluded that none of them were suitable for print in a family publication. But you can at least take heart in knowing they brought much amusement to this audience of one. Stewart Mandel covers college sports for SI.com. To send a question or comment for Stewart's Mailbag, click here. |
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||||
