With Colorado officially off to the Pac 10 and Nebraska's "official" announcement about moving to the Big Ten expected today, college football is in a state of flux that we haven't seen in...well probably ever. So many scenarios, so many possibilities, so many different takes on what could happen. After reading a LOT of informed opinions this morning with the opening match of the World Cup on in the background, I have a few expanded related questions...
IF THE BIG TEN CAN'T GET NOTRE DAME OR TEXAS, IS THERE ANY SENSE IN FURTHER EXPANSION RIGHT NOW?
Unless I'm missing something, the answer is unequivocally NO. The Big Ten made a solid addition with Nebraska and will now be able to get their coveted championship game with 12 teams. Without question they are stronger now than before, and are the most stable, profitable conference in all of college football. So for me, it makes no sense whatsoever to continue expanding if it doesn't include Notre Dame or Texas (and for some reason, I am growing less and less enamored with the idea of UT joining us. More on that in a bit). If Texas goes to the Pac 10 and takes the rest of the Big 12 South with them, why does that force the Big Ten to expand?
Let the other conferences fight for the remaining scraps and see what happens. Conference expansion is all about money, and about making MORE revenue for your current members. No other scenario that doesn't involve the Irish or Horns seems like it would make the Big Ten's current members more money, so why bother? If the B10 stops at 12 teams, it does NOT mean the door on further expansion has closed forever. In a year, three years, or five years, the Big Ten is still going to be making a ton of money and will still be a desirable destination for any school not in the SEC, and possibly the Pac 10 (while the potential Pac 16 COULD be a big money maker, there's no way of knowing until it actually happens and we see what the TV revenue looks like). We can still get anyone we want outside of those two conferences just like we could today.
Furthermore, why risk shutting out the Irish entirely just for a quick money grab now? No, if you're expanding beyond 12 it only makes sense to do so with Notre Dame, and if the folks in South Bend aren't quite ready yet, we can wait.
WHY DOES NEBRASKA AND COLORADO LEAVING KILL THE BIG 12?
ESPN radio's Colin Cowherd, as well as Big Ten blogger Adam Rittenberg, have both raised this question, and I have not heard a rational explanation for it yet: really, why does these two schools leaving kill the Big 12? Why couldn't you add two of Utah, BYU, TCU, or Boise State and keep right on trucking? What's becoming evident is that the entire conference revolves around Texas (and primarily around UT), and the Big 12's formation was a shot-gun marriage where the Horns called the shots and have basically been running the thing all along.
So what's really changed by losing two disgruntled members? The conference still has the state of Texas teams and OU, and Texas still has its unequal revenue share: so why isn't that good enough anymore? New ESPN.com Big 12 blogger David Ubben has the simple answer: money. UT is the richest athletic department in the country, yet they're perfectly willing to screw the rest of their Big 12 brethren to get even more.
To me, that was the most ironic-and ridiculous- part of the whole "Pledge Your Allegiance" deadline Texas- I mean the Big 12- imposed on Nebraska, Missouri and Colorado earlier in the week: the Horns were trying to pin the blame for the Big 12 falling apart on these three schools when it's really Texas who's trying to make the whole thing crumble. UT could still make a ton of money by keeping the Big 12 together, but they see a bigger prize available in the Pac 10 or Big Ten (while there's a lot of different scenarios floating about, one that will NOT happen is Texas to the SEC). So out of one side of their mouths Texas is talking about loyalty to the Big 12, out of the other their talking to Larry Scott and Jim Delany in hopes of getting a better deal and screwing the rest of the Big 12. You stay classy, Texas.
WHY WOULDN'T TEXAS A&M JOIN THE SEC INSTEAD OF THE PAC 10?
What am I missing here? The Aggies and their conservative fan base are a perfect fit in the culture of the SEC, and would be a complete misfit in the Pac 10. Not only that, but while A&M doesn't have quite the pull the Longhorns do, they would still have a ton of fans in Dallas, Houston and San Antonio that would make them, and the SEC, a ton more TV money. As a matter of fact, I don't see how it's possible that A&M could make more revenue in the Pac 10 than the SEC.
So not only does it make more sense financially, culturally, and geographically to join the SEC, but they could also put the screws to their arch-rivals Texas. A&M would get a really sweet deal of their own, and would certainly lessen what Texas was trying to do in the Pac 10. It's a win-win-win for the Aggies.
WHEN THE BIG 12 FALLS APART, WHY WOULDN'T THE REMAINING SCHOOLS JUST ADD THE MOUNTAIN WEST AND KEEP THEIR AUTOMATIC BCS BID?
Rittenberg posed this idea in his latest chat, and I have to say, it makes all the sense in the world: the Big 12 is obligated to provide an automatic qualifier for the BCS every year. So instead of the Mountain West scooping up the remaining Big 12 schools and then petitioning the BCS for a bid, why wouldn't the remaining Big 12 schools just add the Mountain West and voila! they can keep their automatic BCS bid without having to ask for one? I would bet Big 12 commish Dan Beebe and the folks in the Mountain West figured this one out a long time ago, and when the Big 12 South leaves for the west coast, this could happen.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Welcome Nebraska!!
It won't be official until Friday, but the first expansion domino has fallen: according to the Chicago Tribune the Nebraska Cornhuskers will join the Big Ten.
And we here at GGFB couldn't be happier! What happens to the Big 12 because of this? Who else, if anyone, will be invited to join the Huskers in Big Ten expansion? For now, who cares? As Stewart Mandel of SI.com did, let's take a moment to appreciate the Huskers:
* They're the 4th winningest program of all-time (Michigan is #1, Ohio State #5, Penn State #9)
* They bring THE classiest, most passionate fan base in the country. True story- at home games in Lincoln, Husker fans applaud their opponent before and after the game. In between, they expect Big Red to beat the bejeesus out of them. But don't mistake kindness for weakness: they travel anywhere and everywhere, including a rare trip to Notre Dame stadium a few years ago where Husker fans made up 47% of the crowd in South Bend. Expect more of the same when they visit Big Ten cathedrals like The Big House, the Horseshoe, Happy Valley, and everywhere else. When NU comes to Minneapolis for the first time, the town will be awash in red, and TCF Bank probably will be too.* They're not quite Notre Dame in academic reputation, but they're AAU members and a research institution. Good enough for me!
* Don't the Huskers just FEEL like a Big Ten school? Like this is where they should have been all along? The crowd, the culture, the midwest proximity just makes Nebraska the perfect fit in the Big Ten.
* They will be insta-rivals with bordermates Iowa, but do you know which Big Ten school has played more games against Nebraska than any other? You guessed it, your very own Golden Gophers! The two have met 51 times, with the first meeting in 1900 and the last in 1990. Minnesota leads the all-time series 29-20-2. Still, we cannot call them "rivals" because the Huskers have won the past 14 meetings (the last in 1990) by a combined score of 553-100. So yeah, we have some work to do to make Nebraska care about us at all.
* Still, I'm saying right here and right now it's time to drop the worthless Governor's Victory Bell "rivalry" trophy we have with Penn State, and create a new one for our first meeting with Nebraska. Nobody on either side- not here or in Pennsylvania- gives a crap about the Minnesota/Penn State trophy or the rivalry. Don't get me wrong, I love to see us play a storied program like Penn State, but it's a manufactured rivalry and trophy. The matchup with Nebraska- despite the drubbings they've handed us the last 40 years- is quite the opposite. There's a ton of history there and one that should be celebrated. Regardless of what else happens in expansion, I would say the chances are VERY strong that Minnesota will end up in the same division as the Huskers and NOT with the Nittany Lions. Minnesota/Nebraska will once again become an annual game like it was for so many years, and it should be celebrated as such. We probably have two years until Nebraska starts competing in the Big Ten, so let's start figuring something out!
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Friday, June 4, 2010
Expansion Rumors: Is this the beginning or much ado about nothing?
Most people, myself included, love rumors and speculation and endless possibilities. We love the idea of "What if?" more than what actually happens. It's why where Lebron will end up this summer is getting more attention than the NBA playoffs. It's why SOME people were disappointed with the ending of Lost (and let me just say I'm one of them, and justifiably so. Through 4 seasons the writers had some great ideas and asked some mind-bending sci-fi questions. In season 6 their explanation proved they had no answers for any of it and came up with a story arc that had nothing whatsoever to do with the Island or any of it's crazy sci-fi properties. It was a huge cop-out, but I'll admit, I still really enjoyed the first five seasons. The sixth? Not so much).
Still, it shows that despite some incredible ideas and directions that something could go, usually it doesn't. NBA free agency is another example. In one form or another the NBA offseason is filled with crazy trade rumors and speculation and usually...nothing happens. This year? More of the same I think. Oh sure, somebody like Amare Stoudermire or Joe Johnson could change teams, and perhaps Chris Bosh too. But in the end, I think you'll see Bronbron stay in Cleveland, Wade stay in Miami, and Dirk Diggler stay in Dallas. Maybe Bosh joins DWade in Miami or maybe he gets shipped to the Lakers. Maybe. But because professional athletes overwhelming care more about money than anything else, I think the big boys will stay with their current teams because they can get the most money.
Which brings us to all of the conference expansion rumors that have been swirling since December when Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez and others in the Big Ten starting floating the idea that the conference was thinking expansion again. Don't get me wrong, I'm as intrigued by this stuff as anyone else, especially because as a Gophers fan, whatever happens will impact their teams.
But while I guess a 16 team Big Ten, or the latest rumor of a 16 team Pac 10, is possible, I'd say minor changes are much more likely than major ones. College football is the Old Boys Club of Old Boys Clubs, and none of them are exactly huge risk takers. They are protecting their wealth and status at all costs with a convoluted BCS system that makes less sense, and would probably make them less money, than a playoff. But they still cling to it because it's safe and because they remain in control.
I don't think the parameters of expansion are much different. Yes, the Big Ten has been risk takers, as starting the Big 10 Network was an incredibly bold move that has paid off ridiculously well. So now they're trying to strike while the iron is hot much like, say, Google looking to buy up competitors. It's a shrewd move, and if done correctly, will be another masterstroke from Jim Delaney.
But make no mistake, for EVERYONE involved three things matter over all else- protecting their wallets, their prestige and their control over both. As they've proven with the BCS, the men and women running NCAA schools and college football don't give a damn about competition, they care about making money and whatever you and I as fans will pay to see it, that's what they're going to charge us. While as fans I would love expansion to be about making the Big Ten stronger on the field, remember these are also the same people who helped usher in a 12th regular season game that EVERYBODY uses to schedule a crappy opponent so they can make money and pad their win totals so they can make more bowl games.
As for prestige, I'm talking about their academic standing and the image of the conference. For the Big 12 and SEC this isn't such a big deal, but for the Big Ten and Pac 10, this is a HUGE deal. If you want to join either of these conferences, you're going to not only need to add a lot of value (i.e. new revenue) but also academic standing. This is the part so many people seem to overlook. The Big Ten is the Ivy League of the Midwest, and the school presidents, who have to answer to faculty and donors as well as athletic boosters, are not going to let academics slip in the name of more money. Even more so with the Pac 10 for one simple reason: unless they change this at their meetings coming up, to get accepted into the Pac 10 ALL 10 SCHOOLS MUST APPROVE. The Big Ten I believe needs 8 of 11 votes, but in the Pac 10, if one school doesn't like you, you're not getting in. And there's one school in that conference who really, really, REALLY values academics, and that is Stanford. The Cardinal are NOT going to have their academic standing, and those of the conference they're in, slide in favor of more money. With all of the research, grants, and donors they have, Stanford prints money with or without athletics. So while more money from a new TV deal would be nice, it's not going to come at the cost of what they consider to be a lesser academic school.
Still, it shows that despite some incredible ideas and directions that something could go, usually it doesn't. NBA free agency is another example. In one form or another the NBA offseason is filled with crazy trade rumors and speculation and usually...nothing happens. This year? More of the same I think. Oh sure, somebody like Amare Stoudermire or Joe Johnson could change teams, and perhaps Chris Bosh too. But in the end, I think you'll see Bronbron stay in Cleveland, Wade stay in Miami, and Dirk Diggler stay in Dallas. Maybe Bosh joins DWade in Miami or maybe he gets shipped to the Lakers. Maybe. But because professional athletes overwhelming care more about money than anything else, I think the big boys will stay with their current teams because they can get the most money.
Which brings us to all of the conference expansion rumors that have been swirling since December when Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez and others in the Big Ten starting floating the idea that the conference was thinking expansion again. Don't get me wrong, I'm as intrigued by this stuff as anyone else, especially because as a Gophers fan, whatever happens will impact their teams.
But while I guess a 16 team Big Ten, or the latest rumor of a 16 team Pac 10, is possible, I'd say minor changes are much more likely than major ones. College football is the Old Boys Club of Old Boys Clubs, and none of them are exactly huge risk takers. They are protecting their wealth and status at all costs with a convoluted BCS system that makes less sense, and would probably make them less money, than a playoff. But they still cling to it because it's safe and because they remain in control.
I don't think the parameters of expansion are much different. Yes, the Big Ten has been risk takers, as starting the Big 10 Network was an incredibly bold move that has paid off ridiculously well. So now they're trying to strike while the iron is hot much like, say, Google looking to buy up competitors. It's a shrewd move, and if done correctly, will be another masterstroke from Jim Delaney.
But make no mistake, for EVERYONE involved three things matter over all else- protecting their wallets, their prestige and their control over both. As they've proven with the BCS, the men and women running NCAA schools and college football don't give a damn about competition, they care about making money and whatever you and I as fans will pay to see it, that's what they're going to charge us. While as fans I would love expansion to be about making the Big Ten stronger on the field, remember these are also the same people who helped usher in a 12th regular season game that EVERYBODY uses to schedule a crappy opponent so they can make money and pad their win totals so they can make more bowl games.
As for prestige, I'm talking about their academic standing and the image of the conference. For the Big 12 and SEC this isn't such a big deal, but for the Big Ten and Pac 10, this is a HUGE deal. If you want to join either of these conferences, you're going to not only need to add a lot of value (i.e. new revenue) but also academic standing. This is the part so many people seem to overlook. The Big Ten is the Ivy League of the Midwest, and the school presidents, who have to answer to faculty and donors as well as athletic boosters, are not going to let academics slip in the name of more money. Even more so with the Pac 10 for one simple reason: unless they change this at their meetings coming up, to get accepted into the Pac 10 ALL 10 SCHOOLS MUST APPROVE. The Big Ten I believe needs 8 of 11 votes, but in the Pac 10, if one school doesn't like you, you're not getting in. And there's one school in that conference who really, really, REALLY values academics, and that is Stanford. The Cardinal are NOT going to have their academic standing, and those of the conference they're in, slide in favor of more money. With all of the research, grants, and donors they have, Stanford prints money with or without athletics. So while more money from a new TV deal would be nice, it's not going to come at the cost of what they consider to be a lesser academic school.
Finally, the schools are going to do whatever possible to maintain control over both their revenues and their academic standing. It's why even though both Notre Dame and Texas would make more money by joining the Big Ten, they both won't unless something forces them to because they can still make a lot of money by themselves.
Which bring us to the past Thursday when rivals.com ran a story-at the same time the Big 12 meetings were about to begin- saying the Pac 10 was going to extend invites to six Big 12 schools: Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Colorado, and Texas Tech.
Is there validity to it? Perhaps, as the article states, both the Pac 10 and some of the schools named aren't exactly denying it. And I know where this takes some people: a 16 team Pac 10, then a 16 team Big Ten adding Nebraska, Mizzou, Rutgers, and one of Syracuse/UConn/Pitt which forces Notre Dame to join and escape the collapsing Big East. While I guess this scenario is possible, I'd say it's more likely Lebron signs with the Timberwolves than this actually playing out.
For one thing- there's not a chance in hell Stanford ever lets Texas Tech into the Pac 10. Ever. Never ever. Not happening. I could be wrong, but even if the Longhorns say they'll join the conference by the Texas Legislature demands Tech goes with them, from everything I've heard and read Stanford values their academics to the point they'd put the kibosh on that. But maybe not.
Bottom line is that everybody involved has been in "wait-and-see" mode. Nobody wants to make the first move. So does this mean the Pac 10 invite rumor is the conference making the first move? Or are they just testing the waters to see what happens and who reacts? I'm guessing it's more of the latter, but then again they see the writing on the wall. They understand completely that's there's only so much TV money to go around and only so many networks that will pay it. Their TV contracts and bowl alliances suck, and they're all coming up for renegotiation, so the time is NOW to build as attractive a package as possible.
So I'm sure their aim is definitely Texas. Creating a cable sports network that would be on basic packages in California and Texas would be huge. Adding the states of Arizona, Washington, Oregon, and possibly Colorado, Oklahoma, and even Utah, would vault them right into third in the college football power structure behind the Big Ten and SEC. Again, all 10 Pac 10 schools need to be in agreement which is why I'm really doubtful they would offer Texas Tech.
Still, in a game that so far has everyone involved in "wait-and-see" mode, it'll be interesting to see if the Pac 10 is simply firing a shot across the bow to see how people react- or if this really is a shot to the heart of the Big 12 that will get this whole expansion process rolling.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Things are so bad I'm turning into an optimist
I am a realist. Some would say a pessimist, especially when it comes to Gopher football. I'm one of those crazy people who thinks that with the right coach Minnesota should be able to compete for a New Year's Day bowl birth every season, not just once a century. I advocated firing Glen Mason, and even with all that's happened under Tim Brewster, I still do. I'm believe if Brewster doesn't win seven regular season games this season, he should be fired too. I was anti-Adam Weber last season and do not believe he was ever a 2nd team all-Big Ten quarterback or will be again.
I am a realist, and some would say a pessimist when it comes to Gopher football. But things have gotten so bad and so negative around here, I'm starting to look like an optimist by comparison. I mean, what else can you do with the Sam Maresh news but laugh about it? Heading into the offseason I was SO excited about the potential of our defense, yet since then we've now lost both of our middle linebacker candidates to suspension or academics (although I've heard Tinsley could make it back?), and both of our senior starting safeties- one to suspension and the other to injury. We should get both back, but really who knows? And would it surprise you in the least if it was announced today that Theret was booted off the team and Royston's injury was career-ending?
Yeah, me neither. At this point NOTHING would surprise me when it comes to the Gopher football team. I'm officially prepared for the worst because the worst keeps happening. Maybe having zero expectations is a good thing?
I've also found someone in media who is much more pessimistic about the Gophers than I could ever be- and no, it's not Pat Reusse. It's the college football writers at the Sporting News, who have released their preseason Top 100 rankings. Now, I've said since the offseason you could make an argument for the Gophs being as good as the 7th best team in the Big Ten and as bad as 9th or 10th. But not 11th. There's no way they're in worse shape heading into 2010 than Indiana. Well guess what? The boys at TSN disagree. The Hoosiers are ranked 78th in the country. Illinois is 94th. Our Gophs? 98th. Yep, they think we're going to be the worst team in the Big Ten, and easily one of the worst in the country.
But that's not all: check out the writeup from head writer Matt Hayes, who projects Minnesota to go 2-10 overall and just 1-7 in the Big Ten. I mean that, that is a pessimist right there. Even in my wildest and worst dreams I can't see the Gophs winning less than four games. But TWO?
And Hayes' confidence in this happening is high:
OFFENSE
QB (C), RB (D+), WR/TE (C-), OL (B-)
I will not argue with his rankings of the skill positions. Until proven otherwise I'd say those are bang on. I'd even say he's pretty optimistic by giving our offensive line- which was our biggest offensive problem last year- a B-. Hayes, like me and every other Gopher fan, is apparently thinking a year of experience will make them better and serviceable. Let's hope so.
DEFENSE
DL (D), LB (C), DB (C-), ST (C)
Now here's where I disagree strongly. As mentioned earlier we are currently without our two senior safeties and our two starting middle linebacker candidates. Yet I still maintain that while our D lacks in experience, this is still going to one of the fastest and most athletic groups we've seen here in a long, long time. Our D-line has so much more potential than a "D" gradeand could really be the strength of the team. Yes, our LB's are definitely hurt by losing Maresh and Tinsley (and by the way, this ranking was given BEFORE the Maresh news broke), but with guys like Keanon Cooper, Mike Rallis and Spencer Reeves, there's still plenty of talent there. The secondary? Michael Carter by himself is better than a C- rating. We will get Royston back from injury, and whatever happens with Theret, we'll be ok at the other safety spot. We ARE thin with depth at corner, but I still see a ton of potential in this group.
So maybe all of this negativity and bad news has made me crazy, or maybe I'm just turning into an optimist, but 6 or 7 wins is a possibility this year. Despite what Matt Hayes says (and I'm sure there's be plenty more pundits who will agree with him), we have the talent on defense this year, and IF our offensive line improves and one of the true freshmen running backs step up, our offense will be much better too. The schedule will indeed be tough, but I can find six or seven wins on this schedule.
And if it doesn't happen and we miss a bowl game, then Tim Brewster is gone and we'll get a better coach. And regardless of what happens this season Adam Weber will be gone too. See? All positive signs. This being an optimist thing isn't so bad after all.
I am a realist, and some would say a pessimist when it comes to Gopher football. But things have gotten so bad and so negative around here, I'm starting to look like an optimist by comparison. I mean, what else can you do with the Sam Maresh news but laugh about it? Heading into the offseason I was SO excited about the potential of our defense, yet since then we've now lost both of our middle linebacker candidates to suspension or academics (although I've heard Tinsley could make it back?), and both of our senior starting safeties- one to suspension and the other to injury. We should get both back, but really who knows? And would it surprise you in the least if it was announced today that Theret was booted off the team and Royston's injury was career-ending?
Yeah, me neither. At this point NOTHING would surprise me when it comes to the Gopher football team. I'm officially prepared for the worst because the worst keeps happening. Maybe having zero expectations is a good thing?
I've also found someone in media who is much more pessimistic about the Gophers than I could ever be- and no, it's not Pat Reusse. It's the college football writers at the Sporting News, who have released their preseason Top 100 rankings. Now, I've said since the offseason you could make an argument for the Gophs being as good as the 7th best team in the Big Ten and as bad as 9th or 10th. But not 11th. There's no way they're in worse shape heading into 2010 than Indiana. Well guess what? The boys at TSN disagree. The Hoosiers are ranked 78th in the country. Illinois is 94th. Our Gophs? 98th. Yep, they think we're going to be the worst team in the Big Ten, and easily one of the worst in the country.
But that's not all: check out the writeup from head writer Matt Hayes, who projects Minnesota to go 2-10 overall and just 1-7 in the Big Ten. I mean that, that is a pessimist right there. Even in my wildest and worst dreams I can't see the Gophs winning less than four games. But TWO?
And Hayes' confidence in this happening is high:
Even if Weber returns to his old form, he can't play defense. There will be too many young guys playing in big games for the first time — and against a brutal league schedule that includes favorites OhioThe schedule IS the toughest the Gophers have seen in years, but only two wins? Either I'm turning into an optimist or that's just crazy. Also, Hayes apparently thinks Minnesota would have a better chance of winning if they put Eden Prairie's high school team out there instead of Brew's Crew. Check out his positional rankings:State and Wisconsin.
OFFENSE
QB (C), RB (D+), WR/TE (C-), OL (B-)
I will not argue with his rankings of the skill positions. Until proven otherwise I'd say those are bang on. I'd even say he's pretty optimistic by giving our offensive line- which was our biggest offensive problem last year- a B-. Hayes, like me and every other Gopher fan, is apparently thinking a year of experience will make them better and serviceable. Let's hope so.
DEFENSE
DL (D), LB (C), DB (C-), ST (C)
Now here's where I disagree strongly. As mentioned earlier we are currently without our two senior safeties and our two starting middle linebacker candidates. Yet I still maintain that while our D lacks in experience, this is still going to one of the fastest and most athletic groups we've seen here in a long, long time. Our D-line has so much more potential than a "D" gradeand could really be the strength of the team. Yes, our LB's are definitely hurt by losing Maresh and Tinsley (and by the way, this ranking was given BEFORE the Maresh news broke), but with guys like Keanon Cooper, Mike Rallis and Spencer Reeves, there's still plenty of talent there. The secondary? Michael Carter by himself is better than a C- rating. We will get Royston back from injury, and whatever happens with Theret, we'll be ok at the other safety spot. We ARE thin with depth at corner, but I still see a ton of potential in this group.
So maybe all of this negativity and bad news has made me crazy, or maybe I'm just turning into an optimist, but 6 or 7 wins is a possibility this year. Despite what Matt Hayes says (and I'm sure there's be plenty more pundits who will agree with him), we have the talent on defense this year, and IF our offensive line improves and one of the true freshmen running backs step up, our offense will be much better too. The schedule will indeed be tough, but I can find six or seven wins on this schedule.
And if it doesn't happen and we miss a bowl game, then Tim Brewster is gone and we'll get a better coach. And regardless of what happens this season Adam Weber will be gone too. See? All positive signs. This being an optimist thing isn't so bad after all.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
The poor get poorer...
Well folks... Jeffrick said it so eloquently over text message to me... FAAAACK!!!
As I sit on my deck on this beautiful Memorial Day weekend I decided to check the old Twitter feed on my Blackberry, where I read this from The Daily Gopher...
"Sam Maresh no longer a Gopher"
Stomach punch.
According to the Strib:
"Sam Maresh has one more hurdle to clear in his quest to play Division I football. Maresh, the highly-recruited linebacker from Champlin Park High School who committed to the University of Minnesota in 2007, has left the school because of academic issues.
He will take classes at Anoka-Ramsey Junior College this summer, then attend a junior college this fall."
You should go ahead and read the articles because I don't have the wherewithal to rehash it on this holiday weekend, but needless to say, this is another huge blow to a program that simply could NOT afford anymore.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Is Brewster's Coaching Seat the Hottest in the BIg Ten?
Earlier in the week Jermo touched on what Tim Brewster will have to do to keep his job as Minnesota's football coach beyond 2010. While I wish I could argue against Jermo's beliefs that another six win regular season and a win in a crappy bowl game is all Brew will have to do to be here in 2011, I simply can't, especially with Joel Maturi in charge.
So while Brew's coaching hot seat is pretty warm heading into 2010, it's by no means the warmest in the conference. Just for fun (like a man wearing stretchy pants in his room), let's rank the coaching hot seats around the Big Ten in reverse order and see where Brewster shakes out:
A Cool, Comfortable Easy Chair
Tough to rank these five in any order, as all of their jobs are extremely safe. Still...
11. Pat Fitzgerald, Northwestern
Fitz's job is the most secure in all of the Big Ten because he's been the most successful coach in Wildcats' history at a school with little support and even less expectations. Honestly, he could miss a bowl game for the next five years and no one at the school would even fathom getting rid of him.
10. Danny Hope, Purdue
While Purdue has a larger fan base and expectations than Northwestern, they still don't compare to some other schools in the conference. Despite missing a bowl game in his first season, Hope's team was competitive and even exciting, and therefore he's going to get a few more years to get the Boilermakers "back on track" if you will (and I will).
9. Kirk Ferentz, Iowa
Hawkeye fans LOVE Ferentz, but because of the expectations at Iowa, it wouldn't take more than two "down" seasons for Kirk's seat to start getting toasty. Heck, with the expectations going into this season, if they finish anywhere but first or second you might hear a few grumbles.
8. Joe Paterno, Penn State
Whenever JoePa decides to finally retire, he'll leave as the winningest coach in Division 1 history. With the way the past few seasons have gone, Nittany Lion fans will be thrilled to let him stay as long as he wants. The team is back to competing for conference titles every year, and while everyone knows Paterno long ago started delegating most of his coaching duties to his fine staff, it's working well and everyone's on-board. The only reason I put JoePa here is because if you remember back only five or six years ago when Penn State wasn't winning, the folks in Happy Valley weren't so happy and were ready to push Paterno out the door to retirement as fast as they could. A down year this season (possible with all the losses on defense and QB) and next would be enough for the fans to start clamoring for him to step down.
7. Jim Tressel, Ohio State
All the mighty Sweater Vest has done this century at OSU is win a national title, win or share the last six Big Ten titles, and continually beat the bejeesus out of arch-rival Michigan. At 99% of the schools in the country, they'd be naming streets after Tressel and handing him a blank check. But of course OSU expects more. After losing three straight BCS Bowl games (including two national title game drubbings in 2006 and 2007) and another regular season loss to USC AND a shocking upset to Purdue last year, a sizeable amount of Buckeye fans were lighting up message boards and websites wondering if Tressel was the right guy for the job. Of course the Bucks then ripped off a big winning streak to once again win the conference title and then avenged their previous BCS bowl game losses by handling Oregon in impressive fashion.
For now the folks in Columbus are satisfied, but with a loaded 2010 team that will be ranked in the top 3 in the country to start the season, anything less than another Big Ten title and AT LEAST another BCS bowl game win (if not the BCS National Championship), the questioning will begin again. As a Gopher fan it seems insane to me, as I would take any ONE of Tressel's Big Ten title seasons and take him as our coach for life. But Ohio State is the exception, not the rule, when it comes to expectations.
6. Bret Bielma, Wisconsin
5. Mark Dantonio, Michigan State
Dantonio has done a pretty good job of rebuilding the Spartans in his short time there, but with a disappointing 2009 season coupled with so many player suspensions for the "frat boy fights", he really needs a top 5 finish in the Big Ten in 2010. Not saying he's going to get canned if he doesn't, but his seat will start getting awfully warm heading into 2011.Is it Me, or Is It Hot in Here?
3. Bill Lynch, Indiana
It's looking like bowl game or bust for Lynch, who with a returning QB and some offensive talent around him, has a pretty good shot at remaining in Bloomington. Still, it's Indiana so you never know.
2. Ron Zook, Illinois
1. Rich Rodriguez, Michigan
We finish the list with the man on the hottest seat not just in the Big Ten but in the country. Things have not gone as planned on or off the field for Rodriguez or fans and alumni of the Maize and Blue as he enters his third season. I'm still of the belief that if he would get four years he would win there and start winning big, but he's not getting a fourth year unless he wins big in 2010. What does "winning big" mean? I have no idea, and considering how many differing opinions you read out there, I'm not sure anyone else does either. In my opinion to keep his job he needs to beat Notre Dame, win at least eight regular season games and get them back to a New Year's Day Bowl. But considering how much he's disliked in Ann Arbor right now, even that might not be enough.
We finish the list with the man on the hottest seat not just in the Big Ten but in the country. Things have not gone as planned on or off the field for Rodriguez or fans and alumni of the Maize and Blue as he enters his third season. I'm still of the belief that if he would get four years he would win there and start winning big, but he's not getting a fourth year unless he wins big in 2010. What does "winning big" mean? I have no idea, and considering how many differing opinions you read out there, I'm not sure anyone else does either. In my opinion to keep his job he needs to beat Notre Dame, win at least eight regular season games and get them back to a New Year's Day Bowl. But considering how much he's disliked in Ann Arbor right now, even that might not be enough.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Hot Seats
Rittenberg wrote this morning about coaching hot seats as CBSSports.com did a list of how "hot" of a seat every coach in college football is sitting on.
On a 0-5 scale (0= coach is untouchable, 5= the seat is burning) Brewster gets a rating of 4 along with Bill Lynch of Indiana. According to CBS Sports, there are only 7 other coaches in all of college football whose jobs are in more jeopardy than Brewster's... and TWO of them are from the Big Ten (RichRod & Zooker).
With 4 Big Ten coaches in the top 10 of this list, Rittenberg points out the obvious:
On a 0-5 scale (0= coach is untouchable, 5= the seat is burning) Brewster gets a rating of 4 along with Bill Lynch of Indiana. According to CBS Sports, there are only 7 other coaches in all of college football whose jobs are in more jeopardy than Brewster's... and TWO of them are from the Big Ten (RichRod & Zooker).
With 4 Big Ten coaches in the top 10 of this list, Rittenberg points out the obvious:
"It has been three years since a Big Ten head coach was fired, as Michigan State's John L. Smith and Minnesota's Glen Mason got pink-slipped before the 2007 season (Michigan's Lloyd Carr "retired" after the 2007 campaign). But there's a good chance we'll see some movement in November or December."
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
What could happen?
Here are some thoughts on the upcoming Gopher season and what might happen given some combination of wins/losses.
6 wins (Mid Tenn State, SDSU, No Illinois, NWestern, Purdue, Illinois)
3-1 in the non-con (with the obvious loss to USC) and 3-3 in the Big Ten. These are three Big Ten teams that the Gophers, based on what we know today, SHOULD beat. This record would clearly earn the Gophers a bowl bid, but once again to a lower tier game. If the team wins 6, and the games I've mentioned here are the one's they win, Tim Brewster will be playing for his job in a late December bowl game. Win that game and he stays, lose it, and he's gone.
6 wins (Mid Tenn State, SDSU, No Illinois, NWestern, Purdue & Wisky OR Iowa)
If Tim Brewster's squad wins 6 games this season and he wins one of the rivalry games, his job is safe no matter what happens in whatever low-tier bowl game they go to.
5 wins (Iowa & Wisky, Mid Tenn State, SDSU, No Illinois)
If Tim Brewster misses a bowl game, but beats both Iowa and Wisconsin, his job is safe. The schedule is difficult enough that the bar might be set low and he might be able to survive missing a bowl game... but he would HAVE to exercise both of the rivalry game demons. A five win season can't really be called a success... but winning both rivalry games in one season can't exactly be called a failure.
4 wins
The only way Tim Brewster is around following a 4-win season is if those wins are over 4 of the 5 best teams on the schedule: USC, Wisconsin, PSU, OSU & Iowa.
3 wins or less
Brewster is gone. In fact, if Brewster doesn't come out of the non-con schedule with a 3-1 record (unless one of those wins is somehow against USC), his job might be in jeopardy before he even hits the conference season.
6 wins (Mid Tenn State, SDSU, No Illinois, NWestern, Purdue, Illinois)
3-1 in the non-con (with the obvious loss to USC) and 3-3 in the Big Ten. These are three Big Ten teams that the Gophers, based on what we know today, SHOULD beat. This record would clearly earn the Gophers a bowl bid, but once again to a lower tier game. If the team wins 6, and the games I've mentioned here are the one's they win, Tim Brewster will be playing for his job in a late December bowl game. Win that game and he stays, lose it, and he's gone.
6 wins (Mid Tenn State, SDSU, No Illinois, NWestern, Purdue & Wisky OR Iowa)
If Tim Brewster's squad wins 6 games this season and he wins one of the rivalry games, his job is safe no matter what happens in whatever low-tier bowl game they go to.
5 wins (Iowa & Wisky, Mid Tenn State, SDSU, No Illinois)
If Tim Brewster misses a bowl game, but beats both Iowa and Wisconsin, his job is safe. The schedule is difficult enough that the bar might be set low and he might be able to survive missing a bowl game... but he would HAVE to exercise both of the rivalry game demons. A five win season can't really be called a success... but winning both rivalry games in one season can't exactly be called a failure.
4 wins
The only way Tim Brewster is around following a 4-win season is if those wins are over 4 of the 5 best teams on the schedule: USC, Wisconsin, PSU, OSU & Iowa.
3 wins or less
Brewster is gone. In fact, if Brewster doesn't come out of the non-con schedule with a 3-1 record (unless one of those wins is somehow against USC), his job might be in jeopardy before he even hits the conference season.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Phil Steele Announces His 2010 Preseason All-Big Ten Teams
As Rittenberg notes in his blog, college football guru Phil Steele has released his 2010 preseason All-Big Ten teams. Just in case you don't know, Steele publishes a college football preview magazine every year that is full of more stats and information than my belly was the one and only time I was able to eat two Chipotle burritos in one sitting. Seriously. It's just a staggering amount of information. I bought last year's Big Ten preview and will be snatching it off a newstand (ok, honestly, who buys from a newstand? I just like the word, but I'll be buying mine from B&N or Borders or somewhere like that) when it comes out June 8th.
In anticipation of this monumental college football day, Steele releases his all-conference teams. And not just a first or second team like some lazy writers- oh no, Phil releases first through fourth team. He knows who the backup kicker for Idaho State is let alone who the starting quarterback for your Minnesota Golden Gophers, so the man's word is trusted all over the college football world.
Which, for your aforemention Maroon and Gold, might not be such a good thing. The reason?
Well let's just say you could probably find more answers on last night's Lost finale than Gophers on Steele's four team. There's no Gophs on his first team All-Big Ten. Or his second team. Or his third. There ARE three Gophs on his fourth team however: G Matt Carufel (no really), S Kim Royston (assuming his injury heals for the start of the season), and KR/PR Troy Stoudermire.
And that's it.
But at least there were other teams with as few players as Minnesota had right? Well, do you know how many other Big Ten teams had three or less players named on Mr. Steele's four preseason All-Big Ten teams?
Um, zero. That's right, even Indiana had more guys than us with four, including one 1st team member (the dirty, hated Hawkeyes led everyone with 19 selections. Wisconsin had 16. Can't wait for those trophy games!).
So in a season where Tim Brewster will be coaching for his job he has, in the esteemed personal opinion of one Mr. Phil Steele, not a single first, second, or third team All-Big Ten player. Not one. And I don't think Steele is going to be the only college football pundit who believes this. As a matter of fact, I'm betting you'll see nary a Gopher named preseason 1st or 2nd team in any national website, magazine, or TV show in the country.
Now are these predictions a 100% accurate measuer of who's going to be good? Of course not. Guys come from way off the radar every year, like Iowa's Adrian Clayborn last year or Minnesota's very own Willie VanDeSteeg in 2008. It can happen. But it's one thing to have a first or second team selection and a half dozen guys sprinkled across the four teams, where you know you're going to have some solid players and then hope that some others step up. It's quite another for Coach Brew to have zero guys that a really smart, well-versed college football guy believes are worthy of being pre-season first, second, or third team.
What it means is that to keep his job and get more than the six wins he achieved last year, Brewster is going to have to do not only the best coaching job of his time at Minnesota, but perhaps the best of his life in what looks to be the toughest Big Ten conference in years. And if Phil Steele is right, the Gophers will begin 2010 looking up at everybody else.
In anticipation of this monumental college football day, Steele releases his all-conference teams. And not just a first or second team like some lazy writers- oh no, Phil releases first through fourth team. He knows who the backup kicker for Idaho State is let alone who the starting quarterback for your Minnesota Golden Gophers, so the man's word is trusted all over the college football world.
Which, for your aforemention Maroon and Gold, might not be such a good thing. The reason?
Well let's just say you could probably find more answers on last night's Lost finale than Gophers on Steele's four team. There's no Gophs on his first team All-Big Ten. Or his second team. Or his third. There ARE three Gophs on his fourth team however: G Matt Carufel (no really), S Kim Royston (assuming his injury heals for the start of the season), and KR/PR Troy Stoudermire.
And that's it.
But at least there were other teams with as few players as Minnesota had right? Well, do you know how many other Big Ten teams had three or less players named on Mr. Steele's four preseason All-Big Ten teams?
Um, zero. That's right, even Indiana had more guys than us with four, including one 1st team member (the dirty, hated Hawkeyes led everyone with 19 selections. Wisconsin had 16. Can't wait for those trophy games!).
So in a season where Tim Brewster will be coaching for his job he has, in the esteemed personal opinion of one Mr. Phil Steele, not a single first, second, or third team All-Big Ten player. Not one. And I don't think Steele is going to be the only college football pundit who believes this. As a matter of fact, I'm betting you'll see nary a Gopher named preseason 1st or 2nd team in any national website, magazine, or TV show in the country.
Now are these predictions a 100% accurate measuer of who's going to be good? Of course not. Guys come from way off the radar every year, like Iowa's Adrian Clayborn last year or Minnesota's very own Willie VanDeSteeg in 2008. It can happen. But it's one thing to have a first or second team selection and a half dozen guys sprinkled across the four teams, where you know you're going to have some solid players and then hope that some others step up. It's quite another for Coach Brew to have zero guys that a really smart, well-versed college football guy believes are worthy of being pre-season first, second, or third team.
What it means is that to keep his job and get more than the six wins he achieved last year, Brewster is going to have to do not only the best coaching job of his time at Minnesota, but perhaps the best of his life in what looks to be the toughest Big Ten conference in years. And if Phil Steele is right, the Gophers will begin 2010 looking up at everybody else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
