Friday, May 21, 2010

Mailbag 5.21.10

In the Mailbag, I will answer questions sent in by you.  Remember, if you have a question you want to see answered, send it in an email to ezfootballfutures@gmail.com


Hello EZ…
   So with the spring ball now in the books, which schools do you think will be in the mix for the national title?  Any that are typically not on the national radar who could make some noise?  How about some schools that are usually title contenders that could take a step backwards? 


Matt B.
San Jose, CA

Hello Matt…
    Wow, a three part question.  Very nice.  Well, let’s start by talking about some teams who could be on the decline.  First, I am going to point out some SEC teams like Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.  Each of these big time programs has been competitive for much of the last decade, especially Florida.  Each of these squads I think will miss the mark somewhat in 2010 though.  The Vols and the Dawgs are both rebuilding a bit.  Dooley becomes the third coach in three years in Knoxville, and the Dawgs need to find some answers at QB before they will challenge for the conference crown again.  The Gators lost an immense amount of talent this offseason, and although they guys that will replace them are all going to be studs, it may take a year for the team to rebuild the chemistry that made them title contenders and winners in recent years.
   
   Some other teams that could slide a bit include Oklahoma, who like the Gators lost a huge amount of talent to the NFL this offseason, and the Trojans, who now have a new HC in town.  Although talented, I am just not sure Lane Kiffin will have this team performing the way Pete Carroll did.  Don’t forget about Texas Tech either, who may find that although they wanted Mike Leetch out of town, he may have just taken that powerful aerial attack with him.  Also watch for slides from Penn State, Cincinnati, and Texas.
   
   As for some contenders, we have to start with the defending champs.  I think Bama will enter the season with a number one overall ranking, and deservedly so.  They are a very talented program who is well coached.  They still have one of the nation’s most dynamic players in Mark Ingram, and overall more experience.  Losing Cody, McClain, Jackson, and Arenas from their defense could hurt, but I expect them to still be a dominant program.
   
   Another team to watch will be of no surprise if you are a regular reader of the blog. I think that the Carolina Tar Heels could have quite a year in front of them.  Not typically a factor in the ACC, I think UNC will have maybe the best defense in the country this coming season.  With guys like Bruce Carter, Marvin Austin, Robert Quinn, Dunta Williams, and Quan Sturdivant all currently projected as possible first round picks in next year’s draft, I think this defense will keep them in every game they play this year.  If Butch Davis can motivate the offense to put some points on the board, they could very well make a run for the ACC title, and possibly enter the national title discussion this year.  Some other teams on the rise include South Carolina, Miami, Oregon State, Ohio State, and West Virginia.

Thanks again for the question Matt.




EZ…
    Recently, the sportswriters were asked to revote on Brian Cushing’s ROTY award from this past season.  Some of them felt this was completely inappropriate despite his testing positive for a PED.  What are your thoughts on this?


Casey M.
Dallas, TX

Casey…
   Thanks for the question.  First, let me be clear.  I was not warning teams against drafting Brian Cushing.  I said in numerous posts, that he has tenacity and upside, both of which would serve him well at the next level.  I did however question if he had the strength necessary to be linebacker worthy of a first round selection. 
  
   Now, another thing for me to point out here is that I am not a doctor.  Heck, I don’t even play one on TV.  As a result, I can only form an opinion based on the information I read and hear.  According to the league, Cushing failed a test early during the season, and then didn’t fail another one.  According to Cushing, he was not using performance enhancing drugs.  Was he?  Wasn’t he?  Ultimately I am not sure we will ever get a definitive answer to the question.
   
   I do know this however.  The league is very clear on what substances are banned.  If you take any of them, intentionally or not, you should be punished.  These are professional athletes we are talking about.  Their body is their tool needed to be effective at their trade.  Therefore they, and only they are responsible for what goes into it.  Each player has a responsibility to be cognizant of everything they ingest.  I don’t care if it was prescribed to them or not, they have to know what they are taking, and what the associated risks are. 
   
   Regardless of whether the intention to cheat was there or not, Cushing popped positive on a test, and the league rightfully reacted.  Suspensions are nothing new in the NFL.  Guys like Julius Peppers and Shawn Merriman have tested positive for banned substances before, and been punished accordingly.  I know some folks were turned off by the league calling for a revote on Cushing’s ROTY status, but I think it is the right thing to do.  If you cheat to win, and are later caught, you should not be allowed to reap the benefits of winning.  If it is found that a college team doesn’t follow proper protocols for player eligibility, they are stripped of wins, even after the fact.  If it is found out that Grammy Award winning artists actually were lip-synching,  they get stripped of their award.  It was absolutely the right move for the league to call for a revote on Cushing’s award.  Now, he did in fact re-win the vote, and as such will maintain his award, but I do think he tarnished his reputation in the process.  If he goes on from here, keeping his nose (and the rest of his body) clean, and continues to produce, we may eventually lose sight of this setback, ultimately filing it away next to blips like Brett Favre’s addiction to pain killers.  But until then, every success and accomplishment will be cautiously examined.  And that is the way it should be.  After all, intentionally or not, Cushing has shaken our trust in him.  It will take some time for him to earn it back.

Good question Casey.




Hey EZ,
Big fan of the blog, keep up the great work! My questions are about all of the conference expansion talk swirling around in the media right now. If the Big East winds up having 3 of it's top teams poached, do you think the conference can survive by adding some new schools, would it survive but wind up losing it's BCS eligibility, or would it simply be doomed and headed for extinction? If there is a possible future, which schools do you think would be the best candidates for addition? Thanks,


Eric R.
Ft Lauderdale, FL

Hey Eric…
   Conference expansion in college football has been a hot topic lately, so I am glad you asked this question.  Unfortunately the answer at this time is really unknown.  Right now, no one knows much, and anyone who claims they do, unless they are a conference commissioner or school president probably doesn’t know what they are talking about.  The truth is all we know is that the Big 10 has made strong overtures to 5 schools (Missouri, Nebraska, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, and Syracuse) in an attempt to become the nation’s first “super conference”.  How the other conferences react is still very much an unknown.  We have heard that the Big 12 is not interested in dissolving, and with teams like Texas supposedly wanting to stay put, there could be a real chance of the Big 12 maintaining its existence, although probably not in the form we know now.  As for the Big East, losing three teams out of an 8 team football conference, makes it difficult at best to remain a legitimate force, or maintain their BCS bowl alignments. 

   But since we don’t really know a lot let’s instead do a little speculation of our own.  Below, I have included a table which shows a new conference layout proposal I am suggesting.  The teams highlighted in yellow are current Big East schools.  The teams in green are currently members of the Big 12.  Those teams highlighted in blue are not currently part of a BCS conference.  Lets take a closer look.  

   As we have already mentioned, the Big 10 is making some waves, so let’s assume this moves forward.  They would now be a 16 team “super conference” with some good teams and rivalries.  Michigan and Ohio State stay put, as do Indiana and Purdue.  Pittsburgh comes into the conference and renews its in-state rivalry with Penn State, and both the Rutgers/Syracuse and Nebraska/Missouri rivalries come over in tact

   This move would drop the Big 12 from 12 teams down to 10.  My next prediction would include the Big 12 trying to replace their two lost teams with two others from the Big East (Cincinnati and Louisville).  These teams would open the Big 12 to some new television markets, which increases both conference revenues and conference footprint.

   The next conference to make a move would then be the ACC.  The ACC is no stranger to expansion, having added Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College a few years ago. My prediction with them would be to add 4 more teams to become the second “super conference”.  Having lost 5 of 8 teams already, I would expect the ACC to grab the remaining three teams from the Big East (Connecticut, South Florida, and West Virginia), relegating the Big East to a basketball only conference.  Then, to round out the picture and give them an even 16 teams, I think they would go and add a school like C-USA’s Central Florida.  They are a big school, in a growing media market, and they would be able to renew the War on I-4, with rival and new conference-mates South Florida.

   To remain competitive in this new alignment, the Pac 10 will react, and try to add two schools of their own, increasing to a 12 school conference.  Boise State is a good program, who fits geographically, and would add to the conference’s overall talent pool.  Same thing could be said for BYU, who is currently a member of the smaller Mountain West conference.  

   This would leave us with 2 super conferences, and 3 other “BCS” conferences, accounting for a minimum of 5 of the 8 spots need to fill the current BCS bowl games.  For the final three spots, I would recommend making them “at large bids” given to some subset of a group comprised of the losers of the super conference title games, and the conference winners from all of the other conferences across the country like C-USA, the Mountain West, the WAC, the MAC, and the Sun Belt to name a few.  The only stipulation is that in order to obtain a bid to one of these bowls (and consequently be eligible for a national title), a school would have to be a member of a conference.  This would mean that a team like Notre Dame would still be eligible to compete in any of the other bowls with which they maintain an alliance, however, they would be excluded from BCS Bowls until they joined a conference. 

   So although this is all simple conjecture, this is one of my predictions.  Thanks again for the question Eric, and I hope I gave you something to think about.
 

.
Big 10SECBig 12ACCPac 10
.
IllinoisAlabamaBaylorBoston CollegeArizona
.
IndianaArkansasCincinnatiCentral FloridaArizona State
.
IowaAuburnColoradoClemsonBoise State
.
MichiganFloridaIowa StateConnecticutBYU
.
Michigan StateGeorgiaKansasDukeCalifornia
.
MinnesotaKentuckyKansas StateFlorida StateOregon
.
MissouriLSULouisvilleGeorgia TechOregon State
.
NebraskaMississippi StateOklahomaMarylandSouthern Cal
.
NorthwesternOle MissOklahoma StateMiamiStanford
.
Ohio StateSouth CarolinaTexasNorth CarolinaUCLA
.
Penn StateTennesseeTexas A&MNorth Carolina StateWashington
.
PittsburghVandyTexas TechSouth FloridaWashington State
.
PurdueVirginia
.
RutgersVirginia Tech
.
SyracuseWake
.
WisconsinWest Virginia

No comments:

Post a Comment