I read today that Notre Dame has just inked a deal to play Maryland at FedEX Field for the 2011 season, a neutral site game that will give the Irish four seasons in a row with such a game. They've also got Arizona State scheduled in Cowboys Stadium in Texas for 2013. Last year they played Washington State in San Antonio, a matchup that had to be created purely for the accumulation of frequent flyer miles, and they play Army this coming season at Yankee Stadium. Even an ardent Notre Dame detractor such as myself has to admit that the matchup and venue combination is pretty cool. The only bad thing about it is that it's scheduled for late November, the game before the Irish's season-ending rivalry match with USC. It might draw way more attention if they played it earlier in the season, like a kickoff game, but I forgot that they schedule other activities in Yankee Stadium around that time.

I applaud the Irish for doing more touring than Jimmy Buffet. It keeps their name out there, and gives their still enormous fan base a snowball's chance of seeing them somewhere outside South Bend, which is pretty handy since they don't always accept bowl invitations. Keeping relevant is important for a team that who although has it's own individual television contract, has played Georgia Tech almost as many times (34) as neighbor Michigan (37). Yet with new coach Brian Kelly barely settling into South Bend, the temptation to cut some slack on his upcoming schedule might be too great. Why risk going on the road when you could have a gut game at home and help your new coach build confidence, especially the week before your biggest game of the season? Kudos to the Irish for this unique scheduling approach. If they keep it up, they might be able to resist joining a conference for at least another decade.

Know this: These one-shot games are the way of the future. They allow easier scheduling logistics than a home and home, and generous payouts help ease the financial sting of the subtraction of a home game from the slate. And the venue and/or timing of the game give unparalled exposure. Last season's Chick Fil-A Kickoff Game gave ABC huge numbers, with football-starved fans eager for any pigskin action. It's like a bowl game to kick off the season, but even better than one because all of CFB is focused on you. The game isn't diluted with a bunch of other meaningless games like the bowl season is.

View the original post or comment on Notre Dame Inks Another Neutral-Site Game...

I mentioned recently in my thoroughly and blatantly unbiased comparison of Auburn and Alabama in the 2000s that one of the great things about the statistical site CFB Data Warehouse is the rankings index they have that attempts to objectively compare all of the teams in the sport either all-time, in a quarter century, or in a given decade. Now that 2010 is upon us, the good folks at CFBDWH have finally compiled their rankings for the decade ending last year and we now get to see who they think were the top 25 programs in the nation from 2000-2009.

There are only four criteria: Winning percentage points, strength of schedule points, major-4 bowl appearances and national championships won. Three are pretty self-explanatory, but SOS still remains a mystery. I'm unsure exactly how they compile the number for that. Of course, I think that a thorough evaluation of teams in a given time period should include additional categories like conference titles and top 25 poll finishes--maybe the latter somehow is figured into their SOS. But regardless, it's still the quickest, best comparison a blogger can pull up for much-needed material in the off-season.

And the great thing about pulling up these indexes in the last few decades is that we all know that the national championship points are legit. CFBDWH also allows you to rank teams all the way back, where NC claims tend to be a bit more dubious. The site itself tends to accept what most schools claim in that regard, so you must consider that if you utilize material that old. But for the decade that just ended, I think we're pretty safe. And here are the results:

1) Southern California. 1048.86
2) Florida. 944.77
3) Louisiana St. 910.84
4) Ohio St. 904.24
5) Oklahoma. 889.13

6) Texas. 852.31
7) Miami (FL) 847.22
8) Georgia. 811.41
9) Oregon. 790.71
10) Florida St. 778.43

11) Virginia Tech. 763.98
12) Alabama. 746.64
13) Oregon St. 735.36
14) Michigan. 732.03
15) Auburn (AL) 730.85

16) Notre Dame (IN) 722.85
17) Tennessee. 714.54
18) Georgia Tech. 707.69
19) UCLA. 705.19
20) California. 704.23

21) Penn St. 697.85
22) Iowa. 692.56
23) Wisconsin. 691.83
24) West Virginia. 690.55
25) Boston College. 689.43


The first thing that pops out is that all of the teams that won multiple NCs-USC, Florida, and LSU--are all at the top, followed immediately by the teams that won single crowns--Ohio State 4th, Oklahoma 5th, Texas 6th, and Miami 7th--with the exception of Alabama, which came in at 12th. Georgia, at 8th, is the highest ranked team who didn't win a NC, but they won two SEC titles. Oregon, at 9th, was in the same boat with PAC-10 titles in 2001 and 2009 but no national crowns.

FSU, who won four conference titles last decade, came in at 10th, probably because of a watered down ACC that didn't win a single national championship and didn't go to divisional play until 2004. Newcomer Virginia Tech, who won that first divisional title in 2004, also won conference crowns in 2007 and 2008, making them the second highest ranked ACC team at 11th. Curiously, Oregon State is 13th, having only shared a PAC title in 2000 with a Fiesta Bowl appearance. Evidently, their high SOS rating helped them with quite a few rungs on the ladder. Michigan 14th, who only won one outright Big Ten title, still went to two Rose Bowls, although they wouldn't have gone in 2006 had Ohio State not gone to the BCS CG, leaving UM that open Rose slot. Auburn comes in at a respectable 15th, with the SEC title and Sugar Bowl appearance in 2004.

Tennessee was the remaining ranked SEC team at 17th. Half of the conference was in the top 25. I guess there's really no need to mention which was the top conference in the decade, but you might be surprised who's #2.

So let's hear who got hosed, who got just deserts and who was a martyr!

View the original post or comment on The Top 25 Teams of the Last Decade...

The NCAA football playing rules committee has announced some proposed rule changes, which must now be approved by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel. If you think that sounds an awful like trying to get health care pushed through both houses of Congress, well maybe that's overstating it just a bit, because this isn't double-secret legislation.

The biggest change comes in the way of penalties on taunting. If a player commits the act before he crosses the goal line, the penalty is assessed from the spot of the foul--negating the TD. If it occurs while in the end zone, then the same rules apply, with the penalty being assessed on the extra-point attempt, 2-point conversion try, or ensuing kickoff--depending on the outcome of a quick game of three-card Monty. The changes, which enjoy almost universal support, would take place starting in the 2011 season.

"Taunting and prolonged individual acts have no place in our game, and our officials have generally handled these rules well," said former Oregon coach Mike Bellotti, the committee chair. "This is just another step in maintaining our game's image and reflecting the ideals of the NCAA overall."

Oh really, Mike? If it was that important to you, why don't you just toss the player? Is that what Draco would have done?

Other rules changes suggested include:

Television monitors will be allowed in the press box coach's booths beginning in 2011. The home team has responsibility for insuring that coach's booths for both teams have identical television capability, complete with access to Youtube and Twitter and Holly Rowe's cell phone number.

Ending the requirement that players pants always cover the knees. Just the jock area is fine.

Eliminating the intentional "wedge" on kickoffs and punts, a rule implemented by the NFL last year. I doubt that anyone can explain what the hell that is because all I hear is wedgie...

Recommending conferences that do not have a pregame warm-up policy use a 10-yard, no-player zone between the 45-yard lines beginning 60 minutes before kickoff. Okay, what does that mean? For RV parking? No tail-gating? Special National Anthem Singing Area?

Requiring players who wear "eye black" to use solid black with no words, logos, numbers or other symbols. That will be effective next season, but not nearly as effective as requiring full-on mascara. Sissies! Seriously, they had to do something about it. Guys were trying to print War and Peace in there.

Anyone got any other rules changes you'd like to see? Okay, a few for me:

1) If you have a tight end line up for more than 50 plays in the game and never throw it to one of them, automatic ejection of the player. (Known as the Auburn rule) You won't be needing him anyway, or you would have done it already. Bring in a flanker.

2) Any player whose helmet falls off more than once in a game because he won't button the straps properly in the hopes that he will be seen on TV more easily will be ejected and forced to conduct all post-game interviews wearing his helmet.

3) Any offense, within two minutes of the half, must throw at least one pass per four downs and at least pretend they're trying to do something other than run the clock out.

4) Line the field with sensors and lace a chip into the ball. I'm tired of chains and measurements that drain momentum and lengthen the game time. Oh, and if you could get that yellow first down marker to be visible to the players on the field, that would be cool, too.

5) No more icing the kicker time-outs. If you have one remaining and it is the last play of the game, it will automatically be called when the ball is spotted--not when the guy has lined up. Any attempt to call succeeding timeouts will result in 5 yard penalties and more beer commercials

View the original post or comment on NCAA Rules Changes: Real and Imagined...

From the news of the weird today, I heard this one on the radio and had to look it up later just to make sure they were yanking our chain. According to a site which tracks such things, it appears that Alabama coach Nick Saban has more fans from the state of Alabama on the social networking site Facebook than even God does. You can draw your own conclusions on that one. By no means scientific or realistic, the number of people subscribing to certain fan pages seems to be consistent in certain areas of the country, with God usually coming out on top in most states in the south, but sometimes barely edging Starbucks or the occasional Chick-Fil-A.

Heck, the Saints now rule with Louisiana residents, and while allegiences to sports teams are nothing new, the worship of a specific coach is somewhat interesting, although not totally surprising in this case, as Jimmy Sexton might have had this adolation specifically written into Saban's contract as the Capstone threw him the keys while he deplaned that inbound flight from Miami. God's agent, while unavailable, did email that the Lord may want to discuss the matter in person and released his itinerary, which included a flight into Saban and Tuscamorrah later this week.

Oh, write your own damn jokes. It's what the comments section is for.

View the original post or comment on For Alabamians, Saban More Popular Than God on Facebook: Apostles and Republicans Demand Recount...

With all the recent talk of conference changes, we had almost forgotten the original impetus for it, the Big Ten. As rumors of the Pac 10 poaching Colorado from the Big 12 have fallen this week, it seems that Missouri might not be the only target of a possible Big Ten expansion. Seems that "preliminary exchanges" between the Big Ten and the University of Texas have already taken place, according to a confidential source to LJWorld.com. If true, as strange as it may sound, it's not the only time Texas has considered such an interesting conference arrangement. Before the Big 12 was welded together from the old Big 8 and Southwest conferences, Texas considering joining the Pac-10.

If Texas did join the Big Ten, the drawing power for the conference for TV ratings would be astronomical, possibly eclipsing even that of the SEC. However, one look at a map will indicate that the logistics might be hard to reconcile. The travel costs of all sports would be enormous, and one would have to wonder if the extra money would be worth it. But Texas, already the most valuable CFB program in the nation, could possibly absorb it, especially if certain financial concessions were made by their suitor. Texas already receives more TV money than any other team in the Big 12, and would certainly demand a Texas-size share of any new agreement. There are also reports that Texas may also consider forming it's own state-wide TV network, although no details on how that would work are known.

I'm thinking that this is all a ruse, if it's even true at all. The Big Ten is posturing for a specific reason. Perhaps it's to sufficiently motivate Notre Dame to finally consider losing their virginity independence. Or could it be to significantly drop the price and demands of other potential draftees like Pitt and Missouri? And think about the state of Texas itself. They used to be their own separate country for God's sake. Do you think they would stand for the loss of tradition and see their cherished Horns run off to join a durned Yankee conference? They might as well build another Alamo in Ann Arbor for that matter. Besides, there's no way that UT could drop the rivalries with Oklahoma and A&M. And you can't play two OOC games like that every year and a Big Tweleven schedule and expect to compete for many national championships.

Sorry, Big Ten. Ya'll come back now. Ya hear.

h/t: OU-Ron

View the original post or comment on Big Ten to Dig Deep in the Heart of Texas?...

A Salt Lake City TV station is speculating that sources may be indicating that Utah could possibly be invited to join the PAC-10 at some point in the near future, and that Colorado might defect from the Big 12 as well. Again, this is pure speculation, but what else do we have to hold onto during the dead season between NSD and spring drills? Now much of this folly hinges on anticipated moves that a Big 10 expansion might bring, so keep that in mind. Should the Big Ten go to divisional play, that would leave the PAC and the Big East as the conferences left out in the cold, and we know that the traditional Rose Bowl participants are monkey see, monkey do.

The PAC's TV contract is expiring soon and the gold standard now is to have a conference championship game, especially if you ever hope to attract SEC-like money. But why let the Big Ten choose first? With only three independents out there and little chance of landing Notre Dame, the prime reason might be that the ripple effect will only be a east-coast, west-coast thing. Poaching teams from another conference is going to be like a game of musical chairs, but in the end, smaller teams may get a seat at the adult table of established conferences and larger teams may scramble to be moving on up to the east side..

The Mountain West may lose Utah, but would it pick up another team, merge back into the WAC, or fold, with members falling where they may? What about MWC stablemate BYU? Why wouldn't the PAC look to draft BYU instead of poaching Colorado from the Big 12? Seems that BYU doesn't play any sporting events on Sundays, for religious reasons, and the PAC-10 homey don't play dat. Alas, greener pastures with the Denver TV market might be in the sites of new commissioner Larry Scott. If Colorado did make the jump, and being landlocked by oh, say 1000 miles, could a conference name change be forthcoming? Maybe The Big PAC-12 with Ocean Front?

And why no respect for the Big 12? Seemingly, they're mentioned more often for losing members than the Democratic National Convention. Missouri to the Big 10(11)12)? Now Colorado to the PAC? Someone check the seams from when they welded those guys together from the old Big 8 and Southwest conferences. Does no one like playing with those Texas boys besides Arkansas? Regardless, teams must give at least one year's notice of departure, so for football, that means if they declared by sometime this summer, they wouldn't actually play in the new conference until the 2011 season.

And how'd you like to be the scheduler for that?

View the original post or comment on Rumors: Utah to Pac-10?...

Coming off one of the most exciting recruiting seasons in recent memory, Rivals has announced accolades for their list of the top recruiters in all the land. These guys don't get enough credit most of the time, and I'm glad to see the spotlight shined on them for once. Assistants are the foot soldiers who now carry the day instead of the Field Marshals. Per NCAA rules which limit the HC to one official in-home visit, gone are the days when the big-named head coach walks in at the last minute and closes the deal.

Tosh Lupoi of Cal was announced as the top recruiter. The rest, in no particular order, are:

Steve Addazio, Florida
Chris Beatty, West Virginia
Tom Bradley, Penn State
Gary Campbell, Oregon
James Coley, FSU
Lawrence Dawsey, FSU
Brandon Doman, BYU
Cornell Ford, Missouri
James Franklin, Maryland
Rodney Garner, Georgia
Cale Gundy, Oklahoma State
Charlie Harbison, Clemson
Todd Howard, UCLA
David Kelly, UCF
Bobby Kennedy, Texas
Curtis Luper, Auburn
Charles McMillian, Texas A&M
Pat Meyer, Colorado State
Will Mushamp, Texas
Ed Orgeron, USC
Morgan Scalley, Utah
Sal Sunseri, Alabama
Trooper Taylor, Auburn
Lance Thompson, Tennessee

Some of the names are new, some are very familiar, especially Rodney Garner of Georgia and Ed Orgeron of USC. Texas, FSU and Auburn are the only schools with two coaches on the list, in line with the fine classes each just landed.

View the original post or comment on Rivals Ranks the Top 25 Recruiters in the Country...

It's upon us! National Signing Day is here! It's like a whole season unto itself! Will anyone top Florida and Texas? Will upstart Auburn out-recruit national champion Alabama? Some folks put a lot of stock into recruiting and some don't. We'll have updates along the way today. Sound off and tell us what you know about your team and what big surprises are in store for some teams!

STANDINGS:

Rivals:
Team Points
1 USC 3003
2 Florida 2938
3 Texas 2728
4 Auburn 2485
5 Alabama 2308
6 LSU 2255
7 Oklahoma 2213
8 UCLA 2105
9 Tennessee 2048
10 Florida State 1953
11 California 1875
12 Penn State 1852
13 Oregon 1851
14 Notre Dame 1618
15 Texas A&M 1587
16 Georgia 1581
17 Ole Miss 1554
18 Clemson 1551
19 West Virginia 1533
20 Michigan 1479
21 Missouri 1446
22 Virginia Tech 1430
23 Nebraska 1407
24 Miami 1347
25 South Carolina 1342

ESPN:

1) Florida
2) Texas
3) Alabama
4) Auburn
5) Oklahoma
6) FSU
7) USC
8) LSU
9) Tennessee
10) UCLA
11) Penn State
12) Georgia
13) Miami
14) Michigan
15) California
16) Ohio State
17) Texas A&M
18) Stanford
19) Clemson
20) Washington
21) Notre Dame
22) Oregon
23) South Carolina
24) North Carolina
25) Ole Miss

SCOUT:

Team Rankings
1. Florida 28 SEC 5384
2. Oklahoma 29 Big 12 5147
3. Texas 25 Big 12 5134
4. Alabama 29 SEC 4464
5. USC 20 Pac-10 4425
6. Auburn 32 SEC 4313
7. LSU 29 SEC 4063
8. UCLA 24 Pac-10 4050
9. Penn State 20 Big Ten 3857
10. Florida State 24 ACC 3830
11. Washington 30 Pac-10 3633
12. Michigan 27 Big Ten 3594
13. Oregon 23 Pac-10 3262
14. Mississippi 25 SEC 3184
15. Tennessee 25 SEC 3175
16. Pittsburgh 24 Big East 3151
17. Miami (Fl) 28 ACC 3096
18. Oklahoma State 27 Big 12 3086
19. Notre Dame 23 Indep 3033
20. Ohio State 18 Big Ten 3032
21. Georgia 19 SEC 2990
22. BYU 26 MWC 2900
23. Clemson 23 ACC 2838
24. Stanford 23 Pac-10 2814
25. Texas A&M 22 Big 12 2688 .

View the original post or comment on National Signing Day Open Thread...

Yeah, yeah, I know. We had our obligatory post-season playoff discussion just last week. But no sooner are the last comments made on that thread than the US Justice Department finally answers Senator Orin Hatch's request to consider anti-trust legalities with the current state of the BCS. What Hatch got was a definite-maybe that the DOJ will consider the matter carefully and that the Obama administration may possibly look into whether or not consumer protection laws are being violated by the current BSC fiasco arrangement.

Quick history lesson here: The Sherman Anti-Trust act is the legislation most often quoted that governs over monopolies and such, and the one you will be hearing ad nauseum. Not to be confused with the Sherman anti-tank round, although the end results may be similar. Even you non-attorney types should know a little bit about it. It's been used to break up the likes of Standard Oil and many a early 20th century railroad, not to mention Ma Bell in the early 1980s. Another quick history lesson: On the campaign trail, Barack Obama threatened to "throw his weight around" concerning moving CFB towards a playoff if he was elected president, but that may now be hollow sentiment, especially coming off light weights being thrown around in gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey and a certain senatorial race in Massachusetts. And lastly, Hatch had filed the inquiry after the 2008 season when undefeated Utah was left out of BCS contention and his constituents were left with a bad taste in their mouths for the second time in four years.

For the record, I'm for an eventual playoff and I think most fans are, too, but it's highly doubtful that anyone wants to be made to do it at the point of the gun. Naturally, when you're dealing with over 120 public and private institutions and a large faction of athletic conferences, not to mention 140 years of precedence, change can come real slow. Like national debt payoff kinda slow. But also for the record, I think there is a strong possbility of the government having a case, were they to decide to pursue it. Alas, I can understand the defenses that the BCS and the Old Guard are going to present, too. I'm both sides of the coin.

The main sticking point of a possible DOJ case might be the uneven way that the BCS money is distributed. BCS conferences get more than the mid-majors--which seems unfair on it's surface. But the big boys are the ones who bring in the cash. And it's that 100+ years of name recognition that facilitates that end. Who had heard of Boise State outside of 7 years ago? Look at CFB like a business. It can take decades to build up your brand to become a household name. The final arbiter is the TV ratings and the millions it brings in. People vote with their viewership. And who's going to win out, prime-time programming or Leave it to Beaver reruns on Univisión?

So the ultimate downfall of the BCS may be their attempt to spread that wealth around, seemingly in line with the notions of the current administration--but maybe it didn't go quite far enough. Originally seeking to only match up the #s 1 and 2 teams in a de facto one-game playoff, the BCS drew the line in the sand and divided the haves and the have-nots--a bold notion in itself, but made the mistake of trying to share with the have-nots both some glory and some money. Is no good deed to go unpunished?

Granted, the money that the BCS brings in would pale in comparison to what a playoff would generate, and maybe there might be some inequity to it, but it's better than the old bowl system, which was really stacked on the side of the heavyweights. Alas, those days are gone forever. There's no way that CFB would go back to the old bowl system if the BCS, under pressure from the government, simply disbanded rather than morph into some sort of playoff. That would just be patently absurd. But what is fair, both with participation and revenues?

Forget about any populist sentiment you may have for just a second. The teams are still matched up by POLL rankings. It's still a beauty contest. Theoretically, any team has a chance to win it all, but they're still going to have to be elected to the homecoming court. Cinderella nobodies have won MNCs in the not so distant past. Miami in 1983 and BYU in 1984 come to mind. But typically, consistent national rankings over decades for established programs are what give them the consideration over the johnny-come-latelys in the polls. Maybe Boise State and Utah are establishing themselves right now. I wouldn't deny that, but I don't want government fiat replacing good old-fashioned hard work and boot-strapping

We can all remember when Miami and FSU were nobodies, and can see how far they've come--but over decades, not instantly. They earned it. I've said for years that the stars of mid-major conferences have to do more than moan and whine about their status. It's hard to respect your Mountain West or WAC schedule when stacked up against a SEC or Big 10 one. That's why you have to load your OOC slate with BCS teams. Boise played Oregon last year, and plays Virginia Tech and Oregon State this fall. That's the way to do it. Play anyone, anytime, any where. If I was an AD of a top school, I'd call up BSU. Tell them you'd agree to a two'fer with them: two games at your house and one on the Smurf Turf--provided it's an September game.

My gut feeling? This is all just a warning, with nothing to come of it--for now. Polling data would suggest that such a move would widely be seen by average citizens to just be government meddling, and that the weight of the blame would fall on the president, something he doesn't need at the moment with his own popularity fading faster than a 14 point 1st quarter Auburn lead. Let it keep evolving. It's getting there. I think a big push from outside might be disasterous. It gives us a little bit more to talk about though--until national signing day.

View the original post or comment on Anti-Trust Review May Accelerate Playoff Debate...

In an announcement that is likely to impress squat outside the BCS conferences, the AP is reporting that the BCS will pay out a record $24M to the non-BCS conferences in shared revenue from the BCS bowls earlier this month, up from $19.3M a year ago. The bump is primarily due to for the very first time, two teams from these conferences--TCU and Boise State--went to BCS bowl games. Approximately $9.8M will go to the MWC and $7.8M to the WAC. $6.4M will be divided by the MAC, C-USA, and Sun-Belt conferences.

Naturally, these amounts pale in comparison to what was paid out to the BCS conferences--The SEC and Big 10(11) got $22.2M each and the other four got $17.7 a piece. The difference being that the former conferences sent two teams each into BCS bowl games: Florida to the Sugar, Alabama to the CG, Iowa to the Orange and Ohio State to the Rose. BCS executive director Bill Hancock says that these disbursements prove that the BCS is "fair and appropriate".

Not so fast, my friend. Grumbling can still be heard, most notably from those who were upset that the two upstart teams were forced to play each other as opposed to tackling some of the more traditional powers slated for BCS bowls. And Congress is once again entering the fray. Joe Barton, R-TX, a representative from the aggrieved state of Texas (for TCU, not for the Longhorns. Okay, maybe both.) showed once again that no one from conference can accurately define just what in the hell the BCS is supposed to do.

"What is the BCS theoretically about? I thought it was about the best teams playing the best teams. This simply acknowledges the reality that's it's not about that, but about revenue sharing. It's an economic cartel."

Once again, class, we will tell you what the BCS is about. Not just theoretically, but actually: It is designed to match the #1 and #2 teams in the country in a championship game. It's as simple as that. It's very ad hoc, but others want to dress it up and make it into something that it just isn't. IT IS NOT A PLAYOFF SYSTEM. If you want a playoff system, then install one. But don't try and bash the BCS in it's current state for not being something you want it to be. And maybe all that money can go into an escrow account until you've finished your bitching.

Okay, last I looked, it's the end of the season, so playoff talk may commence. Fire when ready and at will!

View the original post or comment on Non-BCS Conferences to Receive Record Revenue From Last Year's Bowls...

View the original post or comment on Runaway Lane...

Turning the CFB world on it's ear, USC announced late today that Lane Kiffin will be named their new head coach. This change comes only 14 months after Kiffin replaced long time Vol coach Phil Fulmer. Wringing his hands both literally and figuratively at his hastily called press conference, Kiffin said that the decision was a hard one and that ultimately, USC was the probably the only job he would leave Tennessee for.

Kiffin's departure leaves in it's wake a slew of wreckage from his inaugural stint as a college head coach--the pre-season trash talking, the admonishments by commissioner Mike Slive, three players arrested for armed robbery and all the secondary recruiting violations, including the well-publicized one concerning recruiting hostesses. It's certainly ironic that USC, a school who may very well be in the cross hairs of the NCAA's enforcement division, has now hired a coach who's recruiting habits are to say the least, suspect.

Today also saw a public turn-down of the possibility of a job offer by Jacksonville Jaguar head coach Jack Del Rio, a former player at USC, but someone who has no college coaching experience. Del Rio was the second name to be mentioned behind Oregon's Mike Riley. DC Monte Kiffin and Ed Orgeron are leaving with Lane Kiffin, and word has it that an effort is under foot to get current UCLA OC Norm Chow back across town to his old stomping grounds, where he served as OC under Pete Carroll early in the 2000s.

While the dust settles on today's event, I don't think that I'm going out on a limb by saying that Kiffin, by suddenly jumping ship to USC, will now become the most hated coach in all of CFB, jumping such notables as Nick Saban and Bobby Petrino, who both had perceived 'loyalty' issues. As if he wasn't already.

Anyone wanna reach Al Davis for comment?

UPDATE: There are unconfirmed reports that students ganged up en mass and have attempted to block the departure of Kiffin and were dispersed with tear gas. There are also rumors that departing coach Ed Orgeron has told early Tennessee signees not to go to class this semester in an apparent attempt to get them to sign with USC before their committment is official. Again, as of now, these are unconfirmed and we will have more as it breaks.

View the original post or comment on Shocker!!! Lane Kiffin Back to USC After Only One Year at Tennessee...

After rumours had been floating around all of last week, Pete Carroll resigned yesterday as HC of the USC Trojans, a position he had had for the last 9 years. It is expected that he will be named head coach of the Seattle Seahawks today, the job having just been vacated by the firing of first year coach Jim Mora. Carroll, who had a 97-19 record and won two national championships while in Los Angeles, brought respect back to a long dormant USC program.

The timing of the departure seems about right, with the Trojan's seven season conference title winning streak ending this year and with the entire school still under NCAA investigation for a host of possible violations. Originally a NFL refugee when hired at USC, Carroll has oft been mentioned as one of the colllege coaches most likely to make the jump back into the pros.

Now the search for a new coach can be done in earnest. There are many possibilities, but one name that came out early was Oregon State's Mike Riley, who was originally in the running for the USC job back in 2000. It is now thought that Riley will not make a move from Corvallis, having just inked a three-year extension that runs through 2019.

USC enters the coaching sweepstakes a bit late, with less than a month left before national signing day. I think that as a result, you'll see them name someone probably this week. Updates to come.

View the original post or comment on Pete Carroll Resigns, With Probable Jump to the NFL...

In other news, the owners of People Of Wal-Mart have called their ISP & their hosting company to tell them that they might need some extra bandwidth this weekend as a result.

Keep it tuned to FanBlogs for some choice photos of Crimson Tide Fans with the National Championship Trophy.

(Author's Note: Alabama Fans, you guys know I've given you my fair share of BS over the years here. I wish to congratulate you on your National Title. This was just...well...This was just too sweet to pass up.)

View the original post or comment on Alabama to display National Championship Trophy Today at...Wal-Mart?...

AP Top 25

RK TEAM RECORD PTS
1 Alabama (60) 14-0 1500
2 Texas 13-1 1399
3 Florida 13-1 1370
4 Boise State 14-0 1366
5 Ohio State 11-2 1224
6 TCU 12-1 1163
7 Iowa 11-2 1126
8 Cincinnati 12-1 1060
9 Penn State 11-2 1016
10 Virginia Tech 10-3 953
11 Oregon 10-3 886
12 Brigham Young 11-2 806
13 Georgia Tech 11-3 768
14 Nebraska 10-4 724
15 Pittsburgh 10-3 697
16 Wisconsin 10-3 571
17 LSU 9-4 501
18 Utah 10-3 491
19 Miami (FL) 9-4 310
20 Mississippi 9-4 296
21 Texas Tech 9-4 224
22 USC 9-4 216
23 Central Michigan 12-2 166
24 Clemson 9-5 125
25 West Virginia 9-4 91

Others receiving votes: Oklahoma 90, Oregon State 89, Navy 85, Stanford 67, Oklahoma State 40, Rutgers 37, Auburn 8, Georgia 7, Florida State 6, Connecticut 5, Arizona 5, Middle Tennessee 4, Air Force 3, Arkansas 3, Villanova 2

Rank Team (first-place votes) Record Points Final regular season rank
1. Alabama (58) 14-0 1,450 1
2. Texas 13-1 1,360 2
3. Florida 13-1 1,323 5
4. Boise State 14-0 1,312 6
5. Ohio State 11-2 1,190 8
6. TCU 12-1 1,104 3
7. Iowa 11-2 1,087 11
8. Penn State 11-2 1,071 9
9. Cincinnati 12-1 943 4
10. Virginia Tech 10-3 940 12
11. Oregon 10-3 846 7
12. Brigham Young 11-2 814 14
13. Georgia Tech 11-3 741 10
14. Nebraska 10-4 671 19
15. Pittsburgh 10-3 667 16
16. Wisconsin 10-3 587 22
17. LSU 9-4 530 13
18. Utah 10-3 466 24
19. Miami (Fla.) 9-4 336 15
20. Southern California 9-4 217 NR
21. Mississippi 9-4 192 NR
22. West Virginia 9-4 159 17
23. Texas Tech 9-4 152 NR
24. Central Michigan 12-2 123 NR
25. Oklahoma State 9-4 92 18

Others receiving votes: Navy (10-4) 89; Oregon State (8-5) 78; Clemson (9-5) 75; Oklahoma (8-5) 67; Stanford (8-5) 49; Auburn (8-5) 17; Georgia (8-5) 13; Houston (10-4) 12; Middle Tennessee (10-3) 12; Arizona (8-5) 11; Arkansas (8-5) 10; Connecticut (8-5) 10; Florida State (7-6) 9; Air Force (8-5) 7; Rutgers (9-4) 7; Northwestern (8-5) 6; East Carolina (9-5) 4; Southern Methodist (8-5) 1.

View the original post or comment on Final College Football Poll Results...