Red Meat Monday: Good, not great receivers

Opinion is the best part about sports. It's what keeps us going during the offseason, sparking plenty to talk about. And who better to throw out a conversation-starter than CBS's own (and my personal favorite hack) Dennis Dodd. Take this little number he sang a few weeks ago. He was predicting the Big Ten order of finish for 2009, reluctantly putting Penn State in the top two, but had to add this quip about the departed Deon Butler, Jordan Norwood and Derrick Williams:

"A good, not great, group of receivers have to be replaced by what might be good, not great, group of receivers."

Ok, I get it, Dodd's job is to generate discussion and readership. That's fine, but doing it by really shoddy analysis is just being lazy.

If those three wide receivers were only "good," but not great, then why are they all signed to NFL teams right now? Before Dodd says it: We don't know if they'll be there in the fall. But that's irrelevant right now. Today, all three of those "good" wide receivers are in the NFL.

That was the rational, non-homeristic comeback against Dodd's claims. Now, for the partisan retort: REALLY?! GOOD? NOT GREAT?

Butler is the career receptions leader, No. 2 in yardage. Norwood is No. 4 in receptions, No. 3 in yardage. And Williams is No. 3 in receptions, No. 5 in all-purpose career yards.

Remember, that was with Anthony Morelli under center for two of their four seasons. Not to mention, there were THREE of them. Had there been one, or even just two of them, their individual numbers would have been through the roof. Maybe then they would have been better than "good."

More below the fold...

Three reasons the Giants beat the Patriots in Super Bowl XLII

In case you didn’t get to read it last time, I wrote a similar analysis when the Giants beat the Cowboys on January 13. So, think of this more like “part 2.”

Every game has its moments. Every game has a winner. The Dallas Cowboys and the New York Giants both had their moments, but it was the G-Men who emerged the winners. Here’s why:

1. The Giants Defensive line: I won’t go so far to say the game was absolutely won by the New York front four, but if they gave a “most valuable unit” award for this game, those guys in the trenches would win it running away. All season long, Tom Brady kept his jersey squeaky clean, due in large part to the front five’s excellent pass protection. When was the last time Brady had to scramble out of the pocket? I truly believe, after the season he’s had in the pocket, Brady may have forgotten how to gain yards with his legs. No, I don’t mean running for yards, but buying time if the pocket breaks down. But you can’t give enough credit for how Michael Strahan, Osi Umenyiora, Justin Tuck and Co. performed. Though, I’m pretty pissed off that not too many people are crediting former Penn State standout Jay Alford for his 10-yard sack of Brady on the last drive. Even those anti-Penn State/Big Ten assholes at CBS mentioned Alford, go figure.

2. Field Position: Jeff Feagles dropped two punts inside the New England 20-yard line, and consistently bombed deep ones all night. The Patriots were able to return only one punt for 15 yards. Imagine if Tom Brady’s team had been able to work from outside the shadow of its own goal posts? It might have been a completely different game if the Patriots didn’t have to drive 85-90 yards each time they had the ball. On the other hand, since the Patriots failed to move the ball as well as they would’ve liked, they frequently played right back into the Giants hands. New York fielded every punt return outside of its own 20.

3. The Giants Offensive line: This isn’t so much about the offensive line’s pass protection, as Eli Manning was sacked a few times. This is more about the fact that the New York front five often gave Manning *just enough time to get rid of the ball. They never gave up on the play, and did something the Patriots line couldn’t do. The Giants line gave Manning the confidence to make the throws he had to, without the constant worry of being knocked senseless each time he released the ball. I do have to give Manning a lot of credit though, as he escaped pressure plenty of times, highlighted by that final drive. Manning was surely going to get sacked by three Patriots, but miraculously twisted his way free to complete the most impressive overall play of his career. If the offensive line is No. 3 on this list, put Manning at No. 3a.

I hope this dabble into the NFL wasn’t too painful for the readers. I’ll try to do better next time.

More below the fold...

Special Feature: College Football Requires Coaching, Not Just Playcalling

I got the idea for this from the radio last week. I usually listen to Mike and Mike on ESPN Radio. If you’re like me, you know that show has about 20 minutes per hour of actual talking, the rest being filled by seemingly endless commercial breaks. It’s not that bad though, as it gives me plenty of time to tune in to other sports radio shows. In fact, if it wasn’t for commercial break No. 386 on Mike and Mike last week, I never would have gotten the idea for this post. Thank you, Steve Czaban of The First Team on Fox, FSR XM 142.

Czaban argued with his co-hosts that the NFL is a horse’s league, meaning the players run the show and everything depends on them. Their points were made very clear and solid. Names like Mike Martz, Charlie Weis and Mike Nolan were thrown around, nearly proving the fact that NFL coordinators are way over-hyped. I couldn’t agree more.

But in college, coaching is everything. How many times have we seen big time coaches take a horrible program and get it on track within a few seasons? Bill Snyder at Kansas State? Frank Beamer at Virginia Tech? Some will say that the biggest difference between college and pro ball is parity. Others will say that college ball is coming along, and 2007 was a great example of the growing parity. I think 2007 was a fluke, and parity is a long way off, if you’re going to compare it to the parity that thrives in the NFL.

What if Drew Bledsoe never got hurt in 2001? Tom Brady would have remained the backup—yes, backup. Where would the Patriots be right now, if Brady never got the nod? I can’t say exactly, but I would bet a pretty penny that Brady, Vrabel and Belichick wouldn’t have a handful of Super Bowl Rings. What if Terrell Owens didn’t go to the Cowboys? You’re going to tell me that Terry Glenn and Patrick Crayton would pick up that sort of slack? It’s all about who’s on the NFL rosters.

I find it hard to believe that Charlie Weis will ever win a national championship at Notre Dame. I don’t mind the Irish. I actually rooted for them when Ty Willingham was there. Now, it’s a different story. The elite in South Bend, with no real evidence that Weis could coach at the collegiate level, showered the man with a contract like none other—at least, that early in a coach’s tenure.

What did Weis do at New England? He won with the best team. And don’t give me “They beat the Rams.” The Rams were all offense, and the Patriots only scored 24 points. After that first Super Bowl win, the Patriots were on auto-pilot. I think Weis was given a little bit too much credit for “his” offense. If Weis was the wheel that turned the engine, then why didn’t that Patriot offense go into the tank after he left, or at least slow down a bit.

Fast forward to 2005. When Weis landed in South Bend, he inherited a plug-and-play team. He had a Heisman contender in Brady Quinn, and two huge receivers that gained more than 1,000 yards each that season. It was perfect for a “Charlie Weis Offense.” It’s easy to make up all sorts of crazy, complicated plays when you’re working with NFL-calibers players, as Weis did at Notre Dame in 2005 and 2006. Keep in mind, Weis had two full seasons to lean on those players—Willingham’s recruits—while he built up the kind of depth that would suit his offensive preferences.

Fast forward again, to 2007. Weis has had two full seasons of top-10 recruiting classes, with the best talent coming in, outside of Southern California. One could argue, Notre Dame has brought in more talent in two classes than most schools recruit in a decade. I’m talking about four and five-star guys across the board.

Super-recruits like 2006’s James Aldridge, Sam Young, Demetrius Jones, Matt Carufel, Raeshon McNeil, Eric Olsen, and 2007’s Jimmy Claussen, Armando Allen, Duval Kamara, Matt Romine, Andrew Nuss and others. Oh yeah, and about half of those players mentioned were offensive linemen and all of them were offensive players. Notre Dame finished dead last in offense in 2007. But don’t even consider yet the kind of class that Weis is bringing in for 2008. It’s not even signing day and he’s got three five-stars, and fifteen—yes, fifteen—four-stars.

Any half decent college coach would have been able to win eight or nine games in 2007. But with or without the hundreds of excuses given by the Notre Dame fanbase, it was still horrible coaching that doomed the Irish in 2007. Sure, the defense was okay over the last half of the season, but not enough to overcome the epic struggles of the offense. Charlie Weis never realized that college isn’t nearly the NFL. I think he started to take the hint when his Irish team lost to Navy for the first time since Roger Staubach’s time under center. But watch, Weis will stockpile enough talent to mask his coaching deficiencies. He'll win 10 or 11 games consistently, but he'll never make it over that hump. Winning championships requires a good coach, not just good players.

Switch gears now and think of someone like George O’Leary, Mark Mangino, or even Jim Grobe. Where have they taken UCF, Kansas and Wake Forest? Two BCS bowls and fielded the nation’s leading rusher. Five years ago, those teams were laughing stocks. But it was the coaching that got them to the level they’re at now. I know, recruiting is everything in college football. That’s true, but how then do you explain Notre Dame’s 3-9 record? It’s not like they just missed at 6-6 or 5-7.

Go back to even 1989, when Steve Spurrier was only known for his Heisman Trophy. That was before he stepped into Gainesville, where a Gator program had been established for years, and the recruits would give anything to play in sunny Florida. He took a pathetic Duke program and turned it into a regular winner. It wasn’t exactly Miami or Florida State, but the Blue Devils won the ACC that year. The Blue Devils have had one winning season since Spurrier left. Their overall record from 1990 to 2007 is 43-160-1. Oh yeah, they lost that 1994 All-American Bowl.

You can’t just expect your players to do their jobs in college the way they do in the NFL. And it’s because of that one word that separates the two sports—job. It’s Tom Brady’s job to win the Super Bowl. It’s Randy Moss’s job to catch a gazzilion passes. For guys like Jimmy Claussen and Sam Young, it’s still just a game. Certain coaches who think going from the NFL to college is easy are usually given a rude awakening, probably once they realize just how good you have to be at coaching, not just calling the plays.

More below the fold...

King going Pro

According to Rivals.com and Scout.com Justin King has decided to skip his final season of eligibility and turn to the NFL. What does this mean for Penn State?

Can Lydell Sargeant step up? He lost his job to AJ Wallace, after getting burned by Ohio State, among others. Now, with Wallace at one corner, will Sargeant get the nod? I don't see any glaring standouts on Penn State's depth chart to take over the empty slot. Knowledge Timmons has a great shot, if he can shmooze Joe Paterno enough. He has blazing speed, and has done well on special teams. Outside of Timmons, though, it's a toss up.

Will the coaching staff move Tony Davis back to corner? Davis was a solid cover man in 2006, and a better tackler than King. His move to safety in 2007 was a questionable call at best, and the jury is still out. His apendectomy clouded any view into his abilities at the position, but with guys like Nick Sukay and Chaz Powell in the lineup, why not put Davis back at his old corner spot?

What if King goes much later than projected? What will that say about Penn State, if King has a bad showing at the combine or on draft day? This program has a good reputation--Curtis Enis, Blair Thomas, Michael Haynes and others aside--for producing solid NFL contributors. But with the recent troubles in recruiting, it would not help to have someone like King become a draft day flop, regardless of what happens during his career.

King finished his Penn State career with 90 tackles, three interceptions, 23 pass breakups, 24 passes defended and a fumble recovery.

Those aren't first-round stats to me. But college quarterbacks stopped throwing his way in a hurry. In the pros, they won't care who he is, and that will be his chance to shine. Come up with a few picks in practice, and he could wind up seeing time early. That is, if he works hard enough.

But who can really blame King for his decision? Granted, I think he needs another season, but not to develop any further, or gain speed and bulk. He needs another season to quiet his critics. Had he come back for his senior season, he would have had the best defensive front since 2005 to work with. That would give him more of an opportunity to play his game. However, can he really develop any further, playing the soft zone on every down? In the NFL, man-coverage is the name of the game, and that's where King belongs. He has to be given the chance to use his speed. Penn State didn't do that.

Good for you, Justin King. Now make Penn State proud.

I'm no expert on how the NFL drafts its players--they don't exactly hit a homerun on every pick. So, here's what CFN had to say:

Justin King, CB Penn State
Projected: 2nd to 3rd round
Good or bad move? Having already graduated, he's ready. After coming to Penn State as a top receiver/defensive back prospect, he moved from offense to defense after his freshman season and became one of

More below the fold...

Whistle While You Work, Part 2

"College football is about tradition!"

"We don't want to be like the NFL!"

Blah, blah, blah... Just shut up. No other sport in the United States has a more civilized relationship between amateur and professional than football. College football will never lose its mistique. Marching bands, cheerleaders without implants, fans waiting in line hours before the game, the tailgating. No, pro will never match college... except for the rediculous game clock rules.

We now enter the second installment of how the clock rules need to be changed in order to maintain the integrity of the game. Swallow your pride and just freaking adopt the NFL rules for stopping the clock during games. How much faster would college games end if the clock didn't stop on first down? If that's too much, then stop the clock on first down inside two minutes of each half. I don't care how you do it, just don't stop that clock every time the head coach sneezes.

What's one thing NFL scouts preach come draft time? Speed, speed and more speed. Not just physical speed, but mental speed. Honestly, how many running backs are taken in the first round just because he "knows the game" or has the "mental toughness?" Now, how many quarterbacks have their careers made for them if they show the smarts NFL scouts are looking for? College football has coddled its QB's for way too long, and it's about time they had to get up and get the ball in the air or in the RB's gut... fast!

Yet, there's something wrong with how the college football rules committee figured this thing out. The new rule change for the 2007 season reads as such:
"Rule 3-3-7-a
A team timeout is 30 seconds plus the 25-second play clock interval. This provision will only apply to televised games. Conference television contracts will supersede this rule. (For example, if a team calls a timeout and a conference television agreement allows for a television timeout to be used, this timeout extends to a full media timeout. The television partners – through normal protocols – make the decision through their timeout coordinator when the ball should be whistled ready for play.)
Rationale: This change eliminates 30 seconds from team timeouts. The committee believes many timeouts are called to simply stop the clock (or when a team has formation, substitution or play clock problems). This reduction in time will save about three to six minutes, depending on how many timeouts are used during the game."

The television partners make the decision when the game should be played? Really?! Well there's a freaking surprise. Hold on, I saw a blatant holding penalty on that play. You saw it, television partners have college football by the balls and don't plan to let go anytime soon. Someone could get hurt out there, like the fans who pump in billions of dollars into the football coffers each year.

So now, televised college football games will be played differently and have alternate rules applied to them just because some network needs to stick in another Cialis commercial? Come on. Although some of the clock changes are good (like reverting to the old kickoff clock rules) most of them do nothing but allow for less game and just as many commercials before. The rulers of college football should stop trying to mask the problem of game length with butterfly BandAids when the wounds call for stitches.

If the clock continues to roll on first downs, like in the NFL, would we have memories like the one of Ryan Leaf rushing his Washington State Cougars to the line of scrimmage in the 1998 Rose Bowl versus Michigan? What if the clock kept running? Time would have run out long before the teams lined up for the last play. You would also see many more coaches throwing to the sidelines during the final two minutes. Wouldn't it look better to the scouts if your possible first-round QB had game tape showing his proficiency running an NFL-style two-minute drill? We'll see, some day.

More below the fold...

Whistle While You Work, Part 1

Wouldn't it be great to take a ref's whistle to work with you every day?

Think about how great it would be to find yourself in the middle of the boss's bitching (you know, the kind of complaining when you're trying to get work done, but they are taking up your valuable time by telling you how your work attitude needs to improve, then wonder why you need to stay later that day just to get the story done) and you whip out the whistle to blow the play dead. Sometimes all it would take to make an employee happier would be to take a media time out once in a while. After all, they do it in college football practically everytime the game clock is stopped.

That takes me to my real topic - the constant debate over how clock rules should be altered to keep the games from lasting forever. There's really two arguments that come from this conversation. The first being my personal gripe with college football in general, that there are WAY too many commercial time outs during games. The other being the obvious solution, which is to adopt the NFL clock rules for college football.

In today's part of this two part post, we'll tackle the media timeouts mentioned above. I understand that money drives sports in modern times, but it has gotten to the point where college football games feel like breaks between commercial segments. It was only a few years ago that commercial breaks during broadcasts were few and far between, mainly due to the fact that it was a live telecast and anything could happen. Why would you want to risk missing a key argument on the sidelines between a coach and his star Cue-Bee? What if the commercial break runs over a few seconds and the viewers miss that 68-yard TD grab on the first play from scrimmage?

Well, just look no further than those fellas in red standing on the field. You know, those guys who look like refs, but have a 100-foot cord running from their headsets to the broadcast station on the sidelines. They are controling the game clock. You thought it was the officiating crew? HA!

NCAA officials, the media outlets and school officials claim that the games were entirely too long, sometimes lasting as much as 4-5 hours at a time. True, I completely agree. But if you want to cut down on the wasted time, don't pump out silly rules like starting the game clock on the kick off, or on the change of posession. Cut down on the freaking media timeouts!

The next time you're at a game, or someone you know is going to a game (hopefully I'll be able to report on this firsthand at the Florida Int'l game for all of you) watch to see how many times the teams are in the huddle, ready to break to the line of scrimmage, yet they have to wait for the media to give them the OK to start playing again. It's not the game itself, it's the people running the game that are the problems with wasted time. The only reason they're changing the clock rules (and stupid rules they are) is to allow the same amount of commercial time, while placing a BandAid on the bigger problem of very long football games.

In part 2, I'll explain why the adoption of NFL clock rules can only help college football, and why some call me dumb for thinking so.

More below the fold...