The first runner up is... Bobby Bowden

◊ Until this week, the argument between Joe Paterno and Bobby Bowden was just filler. Now, it's very much a relevant topic in college football. It's a perfect storm, really, for the conversation to jump to new heights.

Usually, we talk about the wins race during the season, when there's not much room for elaboration. Now, it's the offseason, when every little bit of news is magnified due to the lack of an active football season.

The wins race was also viewed as a close contest, one that would only be resolved by which one coach could make a late-career run, overtake the other, and hope for retirement.

Not anymore.

This week has been dominated by Florida State and the NCAA punishments, handed down for the cheating scandal. We all know that part of the story, and quite frankly, it's old now.

The conversation has taken a dramatic shift to the objective views towards each of the legends' coaching careers. This could be attributed to the fact that, if the 14 Bowden wins from 2006 and 2007 are scrubbed from the record books, this race is as good as over. Paterno would win.

So what do we discuss now? Well, besides the useless, burnt out tirades crying for Paterno and Bowden to retire, and that they're bad for college football (this argument isn't even worth a rebuttal), it's time to take a look at the two careers for their merits and flaws, to finally figure out which coach has the better on-paper career.

The first (usually the only sane) sportswriter to do so was Pete Fiutak, from CFN:

"Paterno finished up last season one win ahead of Bowden up 383 wins to 382. So while any lost wins off Bowden’s total might secure Paterno’s place in history, it could be argued that the Penn State head man deserves the title no matter what... While Paterno got all his wins at one school, Penn State, Bowden came up with 31 wins at Samford against several interesting opponents (to go along with a solid stint at West Virginia). Of course, no one would ever question Bowden’s all-timer status, but when taking a hard, objective look at the two careers, it’s not really that close."

Fiu then goes on to list the worst and best wins in each coach's career. I'll tell you, seeing them "on paper" right in front of you really drives the point home. Even if you take the two undefeated national championship seasons, 1986 for Penn State and 1999 for Florida State, the Lions' win over Miami was much more impressive, in terms of opponent relative quality, than the 'Noles' win over Virginia Tech.

It's unfortunate, really, that this is how it might end. No one expected it to be like this, especially those close to the schools and the teams.

But this is just another episode in college football, where nothing is determined "on the field." Rather, like the Mythical National Championship itself, the eternal argument Paterno v. Bowden will be forever tarnished with a sense of illegitimacy and doubt.

More below the fold...

Someone's not in love with Tebow?

I'll come right out with it. I like CFN, probably more so than any other college football site. Sure, they may not have loved everything I've written about them. But they're still a hell of a lot better than ESPN-types.

What am I getting at? Well, where, anywhere, have you heard someone, anyone dare say that Tim Tebow is not the OH-MY-GOD-HE'S-THE-MOST-AWESOMEST-INCREDIBLE-HANDS-DOWN-GREATEST-COLLEGE-FOOTBALL-PLAYER-IN-THE-HISTORY-OF-MAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!

I just read it today, actually, courtesy of a Mr. Pete Fiutak. CFN on Dec. 9, 2008:

"Media, coaches, and everyone surrounding college football, I’m begging you to quit with the insufferable fawning and deification of Tebow like Dick Vitale and the college hoops-types like to do with Tyler Hansbrough, a marginally talented, grindy player who’ll make a nice living sitting on someone’s NBA bench. Tebow is a better football player than Hansbrough is a college basketball player, but running around and screaming “let’s go” all the time and getting in players’ faces doesn’t make him special. It makes him annoying."

I encourage you to go read the entire column, as it only get's better. But why hasn't anyone in the main stream media seen this already? Ratings, money, good TV, and oh yeah, ratings. ESPN isn't stupid. Tim Tebow is good looking (when you're the Heisman winner, you can get a lot of tail), a good student (well, for Florida), and super Christian (circumcising young Asian kids is his idea of a vacation). All that sells faster than $8 Bud Lights at a NASCAR race.

I think the problem I have with Tebow, which isn't personal, is that people are equating him being marketable with being a good football player. Colt McCoy could be in the same boat, but isn't. My guess is that it comes down to a simple production difference. Tebow already won a national championship (34-6 since 2006). And while Texas has been very, very good under McCoy (31-7 since 2006), he still won't get a shot at the BCS title.

More below the fold...

Some respect for JoePa

In his Cavalcade of Whimsy this week, CollegeFootballNews.com writer Pete Fiutak wrote about media and fans piling on Charlie Weis. Fiutak somewhat defended Weis' decision to negotiate for a huge contract extension, which eventually (as we all know) worked. But in his argument, saying how pretty much anyone would do what Weis did, he there in this quote:

"With the possible exception of Joe Paterno, there's not a coach in the history of the planet who wouldn't take advantage of the situation that Weis was in to get more money. That's not questionable character; that's good business."

That's actually the first time in, well, forever that I've heard an unnecessary complement about Joe Paterno by the Media. Thanks CFN.

More below the fold...