[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Sports Central

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

 

Please Visit Our Sponsors
 
[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

 
College Football - Pigskin Letters

By Michael Beshara
Tuesday, October 21st, 2003
Print   Recommend

I normally wouldn't waste the valuable space I am given here at Sports Central with a letters column, but I got some very interesting correspondence after this past college football weekend that I think needs to be shared with my readers.

Jason from Norman writes:

Do you think the Heisman Trophy should go to the best QB/RB on the best team in the country?

Sorry, Jason, but I can't agree with that sentiment. I feel the Heisman Trophy should go to the best player in the country. It should in no way be an "MVP" type of award. That said, I think Texas Tech gunslinger B.J. Symons is the clear-cut favorite for the Heisman Trophy. Forget the "it's the system" argument, this kid is putting up gargantuan numbers in the toughest conference in the country. Plus, a quarterback's mastery of an offense should count for something, and Symons runs that offense like a virtuoso.

Ron from Gainesville writes:

What is the best way to handle unrealistic fan expectations. Should you try the "win-now" approach at all costs or should you stay steadfast in your conviction to build a program for the long-haul?

Great question, Ron. Personally, I feel you should never sacrifice the long-term success of your program for short-term gain. If you don't have an administration that is willing to stick by it's coach during the implementation of the coach's system, then the coach-university relationship is probably bound to fail anyway.

But, if you have an administration that understands the difficulty of winning consistently in big-time college football and is willing to stand behind their coach as he grows the program into what he envisions it to be, then you have a recipe for success. Of course, a couple of back-to-back wins over top-10 teams doesn't hurt, either.

LeBron from Cleveland writes:

Ohio State Has a monster O-line and are three-deep at the halfback position. How much do they really miss Maurice Clarett?

A lot. Sometime between the time he walked out on a final and lied about the type of stereo stolen from his car that wasn't really his car, it became fashionable to rip Maurice Clarett as a football player. I said last year that I thought he was the best football player in the country, and the play of the Ohio State offense this year has done nothing to alter my opinion that Clarett is still the best player in the country.

Clarett read his blocks better than any young back I have ever seen, was able to routinely convert third-down and short-yardage situations, and, most importantly, was an absolute beast in the red-zone. Without him, the Buckeyes have no purpose to their offensive gameplan, and their playcalling seems to have no real rhyme or reason to it.

These Buckeyes are still a great team that would probably win nine games with me starting at halfback (and I don't have the breakaway speed I once did), but Clarett was who made them special and who enabled them to win the big games. I don't think a Clarett-led team would have lost in Madison and I don't think the Buckeyes can go to the Big House for the season finale and win without Maurice Clarett.

Larry from Pittsburgh writes:

Can anybody stop me?

No.

Finally, Larry from Miami writes:

Now that the first BCS rankings have been released, who do you think will play for the National Title in the Sugar Bowl?

If I had to pick two teams right now, I would feel very confident saying that Miami and Georgia are going to meet for the National Title.

It's tough not to like Oklahoma, but I think their offense has had it "too easy," in that their defense and special teams have dominated games and allowed the Sooner offense to play pressure-free football.

At some point in a football season, even the best defenses are going to be challenged and need their offense to pick up the slack for a game, and I just don't think the OU offense will be able to do that as the pressure mounts and they get closer and closer to the Sugar Bowl. As for the third undefeated team, Virginia Tech, I see Miami blowing them out (yes, blowing them out) and the 'Canes running the rest of the table right to the Sugar Bowl.

Now, as for me thinking Georgia will emerge from the current list of one-loss teams as Miami's projected opponent. Quite frankly, I think this Bulldog team might be the most perfectly-assembled group of talent in college football. They have a diverse offensive attack that can beat you in a variety of ways and an aggressive defense that dictates the way games are played. If they weren't missing five starters due to injuries, there is no way they would have lost the LSU game. Luckily for them, they will get to avenge that loss in the SEC Title game and ride the momentum of that win into the Sugar Bowl.

In taking Georgia over the rest of the one-loss teams, I just think the Big 10 is too tough for any of their one-loss teams to remain unscathed the rest of the season. In fact, two-loss Michigan is probably going to end up knocking off all of the current one-loss Big 10 teams and claiming the conference title for itself.

As for the two one-loss Pac 10 teams, Washington State and USC, one will get knocked off by the other, and the conference champion won't have a strong enough strength of schedule to outrank a one-loss team from the SEC (or the Big 10 or the Big 12). As for Florida State, I simply don't think Christopher Rix will ever quarterback the 'Noles to a national title game. That is not a knock on Rix as much it is on the fit Rix is for the Seminole system.

Enjoy the second-half of the college football season!

Have something to say? Visit the message boards and discuss this article.

Comments? Agree? Disagree? Send in your feedback about this article.

     Back to College Football
     Back to Home

[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Interested in advertising with us?
More information.

 
[an error occurred while processing this directive]