Overdue Mailbag

I haven't opened up the virtual mailbag in a while. It's a busy week (you'd think there was a rivalry game or something), but I thought we should clear the air when it comes to implementing a BCS playoff, Reggie Bush costing USC a national championship (or two), Ed Orgeron returning to USC, football awards, and that pesky East Coast bias. [Most of it's after the jump, so click away!]

After this train wreck of a year, do you think we'll finally get a playoff system instead of the BCS championship? -- Eric F

No. Remember how much people were up in arms when USC was ranked #1 in both polls and still was left out of the BCS Championship four years ago? Or when Auburn went undefeated the following year?

I want a playoff as much as the next guy, but tough luck. Money drives this train, and the way things are going the BCS must be cruising on some tricked-out tracks. Think about how much controversy this generates. Think about how many talking heads are boosting their ratings by gabbing about it. Ka-ching.

Then there are the actual bowl games. KA-CHING!

Here's something we tend to forget ... the NCAA does not award a national championship in football. The commonly called "mythical national championship" has always been awarded by media services (AP, UPI, etc.). Then the power-brokers (a/k/a "BCS conferences") got together and built this monster to monopolize the big bucks. They're a big, private club and can practically exclude whomever they want. Sorry, Western Kentucky.

In order for real change to happen, the NCAA will need more than a pair of giant crystal footballs. If it decides to start naming a national champion, a lot of people will listen because -- hey! -- it's the NCAA. Unfortunately, it will be fighting the controlling interests in the highest-grossing college sport. Then it would actually have to figure out how that playoff would work.

A lot of people object to adding any more games to the season for "academic" reasons. They seem to forget the fact that baseball, golf and tennis tend to travel midweek and miss way more class than football. Even with "just" three more possible games (an eight-team playoff), how would you decide the top eight? Unlike the independently operated BCS, the NCAA can't easily ignore its own undefeated schools from small conferences (11-0 Hawaii is only 12th in the BCS right now).

While a "Plus One" system (a traditional bowl season, then two teams are selected to play for the championship) would be nice, but there's no guarantee that bowl season will produce exactly two worthy teams. There's also not much use in a major realignment, because tradition will trump progress -- probably even in the conferences that stand to benefit. These leagues are working out just fine for all the other sports, anyway.

Football postseason systems are the third rail of college athletics (but at least it's more fun to talk about than Social Security).

For more: College Football Resource.

Any truth to 'SC bringing back Ed Orgeron? -- Daniel T

Barring something catastrophic, there won't be any official word about coaching changes at USC until the season is complete (i.e., after bowl season).

In order for a change to happen, somebody is going to have to leave. USC is already at the maximum number of coaches allowed under NCAA rules. If any shuffling occurs, expect to see the Trojans hire a special teams coach (something they lack this season).

Realistically, it would be pretty hard to fit Coach O back into the USC equation. He's got head coaching experience at the Division I-A level, and the positions he held at USC (defensive line coach, assistant head coach) are filled. It's not impossible and it certainly would make a lot of people happy to see him back -- but don't hold your breath.

Can you provide some insight on the Reggie Bush legal situation? From far away it doesn't look good, but I'm living in SEC country and the local press isn't keen on placing USC in the best light! -- Michael M

It's been quiet on that front for a while. Reggie Bush doesn't garner the TMZ treatment (unless he's dating another pop star), though the whole back-room drama is probably far more entertaining than anything on The Hills. Didja' hear he fired his marketing agent?

The last real news was about a month ago, when shady-guy extraordinaire Lloyd Lake filed a lawsuit and met with NCAA investigators. Remember that these are two separate actions.

The lawsuit contends that Lake gave Bush and his family some serious cash (almost $300,000) and it hasn't been repaid. In the end, either a rich guy owes somebody money or a con-artist is trying to extort money. This side of things could take a while and, in and of itself, should have no bearing on USC.

The NCAA investigation is way more significant to USC and USC fans. Unlike our legal system, it's very secretive and can take as long as they want. The NCAA will not make any official announcement and should be very tight-lipped until it decides one of two things:

1. "Nothing to see here folks, move along."
2. "Reggie Bush was ineligible to play football for USC."

In case number two, the NCAA would force USC to vacate at least a season of wins (possibly two, depending on when the first benefits were received). Revoking national championships would be up to the awarding institutions (BCS and Associated Press), but that domino would fall quickly. The folks at New York's Downtown Athletic Club would probably ask for their Heisman Trophy back, too.

While there may be a hypothetical middle ground and shades of gray, these are really the only two likely outcomes. Since there's nothing anybody can do to predict when the NCAA will make up its mind, try to act like the football team: Focus on whatever's ahead and ignore that which you can't control.

Are any Trojans going to win big postseason awards this year? I had high hopes for Big Sed. -- Edgar M

I'm glad you asked (seriously, the press releases are starting to pile up). All those preseason "watch lists" (often 60+ names long) are being whittled down and now we have some serious candidates. Here's a quick look at the awards front:

• Fred Davis is one of three finalists for the John Mackey Award for the nation's top tight end.
• Pete Carroll didn't even make the watch list for the Bear Bryant College Coach of the Year award. Lloyd Carr and Nick Saban did make the list, so go figure. Carroll has never won the award.
• In short-term news, DE Lawrence Jackson was named national player of the week by the Walter Camp Foundation for his performance against Arizona State. He was also the Pac-10 defensive player of the week. His four sacks tied a single-game school record and his 5.5 tackles for a loss set a new one.
• If you want more on the Trojans' top awards candidates, check out this site by USC, including some highlight reels.

How can Southern Illinois still be ranked ahead of USC [in basketball]? Who rigs these things? -- Lisa P

You have to feel bad for everybody on the East Coast. Not only do they get bitter cold winters, but the nation's best basketball conference plays after their bedtime. Considering how late it was when USC obliterated then-18th ranked Salukis (tipoff at 11 p.m. Eastern), a lot of voters probably missed the box score. Fewer watched.

Of course, you're only referring to the ESPN/USA Today poll, where the SIU is #22 and USC is #24. In the Associated Press poll, USC is #22 and SIU fell out of the Top 25. It could have been better, but it could have been worse.The AP noticed that things were funky and literally  demanded a recount the following morning.

Don't get ruffled by rankings this early in the season. It'll improve later on when games become more important. Also remember that these rankings have nothing to do with who makes the Big Dance.

I've been informed that the L.A. Times does not allow reporters to participate in media polls. The idea is to ensure an independent media that's not a part of the story. I'll try to find out more about that for a later post.

Why are there so many key injuries at quarterback this year in college football? Is that the most dangerous position? -- Phil M

Football is a contact sport and injuries can happen anywhere, anytime. The most dangerous position I can think of is underwater toaster tester.

Comments

[Bobak]

I assume blame the darned spell check functions, but I'm pretty sure the NCAA doesn't care of Reggie is intelligible --although he certainly is more intelligible than many players who make it through alleged institutions of higher learning.

[Shermaclay]

I disagree that if the NCAA finds Reggie Bush took compensation that he will automatically be declared retroactively ineligible and USC will automatically forfeit games in which he played. There are many examples of it becoming clear in retrospect that an athelete should have been ineligible where the NCAA DID NOT make the school forfeit games.

The most notorious example is Charles Woodson, who admitted in grand jury testimony that he took money from an agent while still playing for Michigan. The NCAA didn't make Michigan forfeit games; the AP and Coaches Poll didn't retract Michigan's national champtionship; the Heisman Foundation didn't revoke Woodson's trophy. Why should the case of Reggie Bush be different?

[Adam Rose]

Hmmm ... that pesky paper clip failed me! And yes, Bush is very intelligible. He's actually one of the sharper kids to have come through the program. As I recall he wanted to go to medical school had the football thing not worked out.

While the NCAA is notoriously inconsistent, the type of scrutiny this case has received would make it hard for them not to act if they actually have something solid to go on. Just recently, they ruled that Oklahoma should forfeit their wins from 2005 based on a scandal involving three players and $17,000. Of course, that's still under appeal:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/110307dnspooubrief.1d0be5d23.html

If the worst case happens, one of the ugliest consequences would be the adverse effect on Pete Carroll's permanent win-loss record.

[24-23; 28-21, etc. etc.]

Football is a collision sport; dancing is a contact sport. (Darrell Royal)

[Shermaclay]

The key distinction that puts the Oklahoma case on one side and the Woodson and Bush cases on the other is the difference between boosters and agents. As I understand it, the benefits the Oklahoma players received came from boosters, fans affiliated with the program who were members of support groups. The NCAA is strict about benefits coming from boosters for obvious reasons. Without punishments, boosters might well shower players with money to get them to come and stay at their school. Because the boosters thrive on contact with the program, frequently talking to coaches and athletic department staff, it is reasonable to expect the program to monitor the boosters and control them.

It is different with agents. An agent's incentive is to shower players with money to sign them up and GET THEM TO LEAVE THE SCHOOL and go to the NFL as soon as possible. They have no need for contact with coaches and others in the program. Nor does the school (or the NCAA) have an easy way to discourage agents since the agents don't depend on either institution for their own livelihood. Accordingly, punishing the school for failure to monitor agents is generally to make the school responsible for something over which it has no control.

Of course, if the activities of a particular agent were known to a school, or reasonably should have been known, that would be a different situation. That's the key issue here. But if USC did not know what the agents were doing to (allegedly) funnel money to Bush and his family, then the situation would be much more like the Charles Woodson situation with his agent (no retroactive forfeiture) than the Oklahoma situation with its boosters (retroactive forfeiture).