.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
Mailbag: What Week 1 mega-game could have sneaky playoff implications?
Spring-game mania has become quite the phenomenon in recent years. Never would I have imagined we'd see a day where 100,000 fans attend an April intrasquad scrimmage, as occurred at Ohio State last weekend. Or that more people would tune in to watch Alabama's spring game than the NHL playoffs.
(OK, that last part is fairly believable.)
But with the big crowds and national broadcasts comes extra attention to what coaches themselves consider just one practice. And last Saturday, a pair of freshman quarterbacks at Georgia and Texas seized the spotlight.
How far can a team realistically go with a true freshman QB? Could a Jacob Eason really lead Georgia to the CFP no matter how talented? Is it worth it to sacrifice a shot at the playoffs this season in order to develop a QB?
-- John M. Fort Worth, Texas
Jacob Eason
I remember discussing this same topic last year in regards to Josh Rosen at UCLA. The Bruins seemingly had the pieces around him for a championship run, but could a Week 1 true freshman quarterback lead his team to the playoff? Defensive injuries ultimately decimated UCLA, but as we saw, even a freshman as gifted as Rosen -- a guy who many consider the most talented passer in college football -- is not immune to rookie growing pains. He finished the season the nation's 55th-rated passer, completing a modest 60 percent (predecessor Brett Hundley was 69.1 percent in the same offense a year earlier) with 11 interceptions (Hundley had five).
So while Eason showed off an as-advertised cannon arm last Saturday, I don't believe any true freshman can achieve that level of success immediately. Furthermore, it will be harder for Eason -- who's adapting to a pro-style offense after running the more common shotgun-spread in high school -- than it was for Rosen. There's a reason he finished spring still the third-string quarterback.
All that being said, I don't believe Greyson Lambert or Brice Ramsey can lead the Dawgs to the playoff, either. Part of that is Georgia may not be able to provide its quarterbacks with enough help on offense. A healthy Nick Chubb would obviously be a huge plus, but the Dawgs' offensive line is of huge concern. Kirby Smart is counting heavily on Rhode Island grad transfer Tyler Catalina to come in and help plug a hole. Playing in the weak SEC East certainly helps Georgia's cause, but I still think the Dawgs' best-case scenario may be a 10-2 season, with 9-3 or 8-4 much more realistic.
Of course, coaches don't think like that going into the season. Smart and his staff are aiming for a championship, and so I would not be surprised if Ramsey or, less likely, Lambert, opens the season under center, given they're so much farther ahead in experience. But rest assured, Eason will take over at some point, it's just a matter of whether it's early (like the second half of the season opener) or only after the Dawgs take a couple of losses. As of today, I'd predict he's the guy by no later than the important Oct. 1 Tennessee game.
Hi Stewart, longtime reader and occasional question-supplier here. I'd appreciate your take on the quarterback situation after the spring game at Texas.
-- David R Butler, San Marcos, TX
Charlie Strong
It's eerily similar to Georgia's, with the caveat that no one's speculating whether Texas, 5-7 last year, will go to the playoff. On the other hand, Longhorns coach Charlie Strong is under a heck of a lot more pressure this fall than Smart.
Freshman Shane Buechele looked sharp and comfortable running Texas' new Baylor-style offense, one that's simpler and better tailored for a freshman than Georgia's. That's quite the departure from senior Tyrone Swoopes, who's already been through the ringer throughout his career and suffered a 4-of-16 day last Saturday. Jerrod Heard missed the game with an injury, but he was behind Swoopes to start spring. So suffice to say it's probably between the other two.
Now, a couple requisite caveats. Buechele mostly played against Texas' second-string defense, which, given the Horns' youth, probably isn't good. Also, a couple drops on long balls hurt Swoopes' numbers. By all accounts he's had a better spring than he showed on Saturday. But, the fans did not see those other practices. They saw this one. And now they're going to expect to see Buechele trot out against Notre Dame on Sept. 4 no matter how much Strong and offensive coordinator Sterlin Gilbert try to temper the hype.
In Texas' case, I would bet Buechele does wind up the opening day starter. It helps that Texas has a potentially special backfield with Chris Warren and D'Onta Foreman and a couple of potential stud receivers in speedster John Burt and 6-foot-6 freshman Collin Johnson. Buechele is not likely to lead Texas to a Big 12 title as a freshman, but he could certainly get them to eight or nine wins and finally put Strong on solid footing.
Last season, Oklahoma made a fourth-quarter comeback against Tennessee early in the season that many people didn't think was a big deal at the time, but turned out to be huge for the playoff race. What non-conference early season game is one that could end up being a playoff decider but might not have the buzz some of the Week 1 games have?
-- Ross Wallen, Sudbury Ontario Canada
Josh Rosen and Jim Mora
Well, the Week 1 games that figure to get the most attention will be Alabama-USC, Notre Dame-Texas, LSU-Wisconsin and Oklahoma-Houston. If any or all of those wind up having playoff implications it won't come as a surprise to anyone. But what about the UCLA-Texas A&M game that same weekend?
Both teams will be flying under the radar a bit after disappointing eight-win seasons in 2015 -- just like Oklahoma last season -- and either or both could be much-improved. The Bruins bring back Rosen, some good young skill talent and a lot of veteran defenders. Coincidentally, A&M grad transfer quarterback Trevor Knight played for Oklahoma in that 2015 Tennessee game. If you believe the recruiting rankings, the Aggies are talented. Perhaps I was just a year too soon on my lofty and regrettable A&M prediction prior to last season.
If nothing else, that game will be interesting because both teams are changing their offensive systems. Former UCLA coordinator Noel Mazzone will make his A&M debut against his former team, while Kennedy Polamalu takes over for Mazzone with the Bruins. Expect A&M to remain a spread team but shift away from its Air Raid roots, while UCLA incorporates more pro-style elements.
There's a generally accepted opinion that if the coach(es) at Rutgers could consistently keep a substantial number of the top New Jersey recruits in-state, Rutgers should be able to become a significant player in the Big Ten. Not necessarily a perennial championship contender, given its division, but still.... Do you agree with that premise, and if so, do you think Chris Ash could be the guy to get things rolling?
-- Charles Bristow, Bloomington, Ill.
Chris Ash
Indeed, when the Big Ten added Rutgers it annexed a fertile recruiting territory. Scout.com currently lists six four-star and 21 three-star recruits from that state in the class of 2017. If that were one team's recruiting class it would easily rank in the Top 10 nationally. And while a blip in the program's history, Greg Schiano demonstrated a decade ago that you can win at a fairly high rate there with mostly homegrown talent. Granted, Rutgers was in the Big East then, which was not nearly as strong as today's Big Ten. But then, the Big Ten should enable Rutgers to attract better recruits than it did a decade ago.
I don't have a strong opinion either way on Ash. It's incredibly hard to predict how any first-time head coach will fare, but even more so a former defensive coordinator. The rankings of his defenses at Wisconsin, Arkansas and Ohio State don't really hold any bearing on what kind of head coach he'll be. I do find his offensive coordinator hire intriguing -- Drew Mehringer is only 28, with just one year of play-calling experience, at FCS James Madison, but has worked under Urban Meyer and Tom Herman and is installing their style of spread offense.
I believe Ash can improve Rutgers' recruiting, but the competition for top-flight New Jersey talent is more intense than ever. Jim Harbaugh is such a presence in the state (having lured stars Jabrill Peppers and Rashan Gary) that he's now giving high school commencement addresses there. It would be unrealistic to think Ash will beat out Harbaugh, Meyer or James Franklin for recruits on a consistent basis. That puts the onus on Ash and his staff to identify the next-level down kids who can develop into good college players -- the type of guys he coached at Wisconsin, for example. Do that and the program can at least become a consistent winner in a division where even finishing in the upper half means you're beating out two from the group of Ohio State, Michigan State, Michigan and Penn State.
Long-time reader, first-time writer. It seems odd to me that the NCAA put a three-year moratorium on new bowl games due to teams with 5-7 records or an intra-conference pairing occurring in 2015. With 40 bowl games for 128 FBS teams, how could anyone not have seen this coming? And is there any chance bowls will pare down to 20 games like 25 years ago to regain prestige?
-- Ken, Hollywood, California
The aftermath of the Arizona Bowl
First of all, thanks Ken. I'd urge any of you other long-time readers, yet-to-be first-time contributors to send some questions this offseason. I can't put out a Mailbag without mail.
That three-year moratorium is about three years too late. Despite the fact we came close to a shortage of eligible teams on a couple of occasions in recent years, the NCAA just kept signing off on virtually any city that could provide proof of a stadium, sponsor and TV network. Sometimes you didn't even need that. At the start of last season, the new Arizona Bowl -- the one that got stuck with two Mountain West teams -- did not yet have a sponsor, TV partner or set date. That's how lax things had gotten.
But that's about all the NCAA can do. You can't force independent entities to shut down. That's an easy lawsuit waiting to happen. And the bowl industry itself likely isn't as concerned as you are. Most of the bowls that sprung up over the last decade were not born of the same mission as their predecessors. They're purely TV programming. And to that end, the fact that four million people watched 5-7 Nebraska play UCLA in the Foster Farms Bowl tells you they're not as hung up on these things as perhaps we in the media are.
Do you expect a regression to the mean for Iowa? In 2015, Iowa was just 47th in the S&P+ efficiency ratings and went 5-0 in games decided by eight points prior to the Big Ten championship game. Yet, as mediocre as they were, because of schedule strength and Michigan State's upset over Ohio State, Iowa was one minute away from a playoff berth. Related to that, will committee members continue to overvalue the ability to avoid losses and undervalue high-end wins?
-- David Lindquist, Washington D.C.
Kirk Ferentz
Yes, I'd expect Iowa to regress a little just because that's been the pattern throughout Kirk Ferentz's 17-year tenure. Save for a great run from 2002-04 in which it went 31-7 and shared two Big Ten titles, Iowa has struggled to string together great seasons. And that's because of exactly what you're discussing. The Hawkeyes are never going to burst at the seams with NFL-caliber talent, so they don't have much margin for error. Some years they may catch all the breaks and win 11 or 12 games, then come back the next and swing the other way. Case in point, its 2009 team that went 11-2 and won the Orange Bowl won four games by three points or less. The next year, with virtually the same core roster, it lost four games by four points or less and finished 8-5.
As for the second point, if you're asking whether the committee is going to start putting more value on advanced metrics than wins and losses, I'd say, not anytime soon. In college football they're still relatively young and still far from being embraced by the mainstream. Further, I'd point to Oklahoma last season as an example of the committee placing far more value on high-end wins (Tennessee, Baylor, TCU and Oklahoma State) than avoiding losses (which the Sooners didn't, falling to 5-7 Texas).
It's easy to say with hindsight that Iowa should not have been in the discussion, but with such small sample sizes and such a longstanding premium on going undefeated, I don't see how you could leave out a 13-0 Power 5 champ. Yet. Maybe the time will come when the committee starts going full-on deep dive with the numbers, but right now I doubt much of the public would accept that.
Last season, USC started with the ninth-most accomplished coach in the Pac-12, behind Mark Helfrich, David Shaw, Jim Mora, Kyle Whittingham, Todd Graham, Rich Rod, Mike Leach, and Chris Peterson. Even if it's an upgrade from seven-win Sark, why would the Trojans expect any changes with a coach, Clay Helton, who is still at best the No. 9 pick in the conference if you needed one coach to win a game?
-- Dan Klobucar, Minneapolis
Clay Helton
At first glance that seems a harsh assessment of Helton, but I can't argue with putting a career 6-4 coach behind a bunch of guys who have won division or conference titles. It speaks to the depth of the coaching lineup in that conference. It's no secret that outgoing AD Pat Haden's decision to promote Helton rather than try to go out and land a big name did not exactly inspire confidence around USC, whereas, for example, the two Washington fan bases were elated when their schools were able to lure Petersen (UW) and Leach (WSU).
But I also don't think it's fair to completely discount Helton yet when he is still essentially a first-year coach. Previously he took over under less-than-ideal circumstances, and he's yet to coach a game with his own hand-picked staff. Unfortunately for Helton, though, he's going to be judged plenty over the course of this, his first full season, when the Trojans are playing the most unforgiving schedule imaginable. USC opens against Alabama in Jerry World, followed shortly thereafter by trips to Stanford and Utah. The middle is soft, but the last four are Oregon, at Washington, at UCLA and Notre Dame.
I'm not sure many of the more accomplished names on the list would make it through that slate with an impressive record.
Stewart, Considering that Villanova beat college basketball giant North Carolina, what would the equivalent scenario be in college football? I am talking about the differences in program money and resources that I assume would give North Carolina a large advantage, or does Villanova have lots of money and resources? Would Villanova's win be say equivalent to Cincinnati or Colorado State winning the college football title over Alabama?
-- Jeff, Salt Lake City
Dabo Swinney and Nick Saban
It's hard to make that comparison because there's a layer to the college basketball hierarchy that doesn't exist in football. In football, it's a pretty sharp dividing line between the Power 5 conferences and everybody else both financially and competitively. While the Big East no longer sponsors FBS football, it remains a power conference in basketball, rated higher last season than the Big Ten and SEC.
Villanova's overall athletic department does not generate nearly the revenue of UNC, but its men's basketball team is credited with $10.4 million in 2014-15, per its Department of Education filing, half that of UNC hoops ($20.8 million). That's not nearly the gap in football between a power like Alabama ($97 million) and, per your example, Cincinnati ($13.8 million).
Comparing revenue figures is far from a perfect measuring stick (especially since schools differ in how they report them), but applying the UNC-Villanova ratio, the scenario you describe very nearly occurred in this past season's College Football Playoff. Clemson's program took in less than half ($44 million) that of Alabama's yet only lost by five points.
If anything, that would have been hailed a bigger "Cinderella" story than 'Nova-UNC.
