WEEK IN REVIEW

I have come up with a format for the offseason. Each week I will do a week in review on Saturday that touches on the big stories of the week. Then you can give your input in the comments section about what stories you want to hear more about from me. Don't feel limited by the list I provide. If something interests you and I left it off my list, put it in the comments and I will research it and give my take during the week. I want to know what interests you so I can provide a better experience for you.

This week the big stories include:

1. The NCAA finding Michigan out of compliance on practices.

2. The NCAA finishing its hearings of the USC athletic department.

3. The NFL combine in Indianapolis.

4. New rules regarding the eye black and celebration penalties. Eye black must be just that, no logos, numbers, words, or scripture references. Celebration penalties will now be live ball fouls, so touchdowns will be called back if a player celebrates excessively.

Now it's your turn to tell me what you think and want more of.

POLL RESULTS: Best addition to the Pac-10

Colorado was the winner for the best school to join the Pac-10. The Buffs received 50% of the vote. Utah and Boise State were the only other vote getters.

Vote in the new poll posted for this week: Who will make the biggest impression on scouts at the NFL draft combine?

MORE CONFERENCE EXPANSION THOUGHTS

Since conference expansion usually takes months and years to happen, this will probably be a hot topic until September. There are about a million angles to take on this topic. Today, I will elaborate on three: TCU going to the Big 12, the Big 10 targeting ACC or SEC teams, and the impact on the BCS.

1.TCU to the Big12

Since it appears that the Big 12 is going to be hit by either the Big 10 (Missouri or Nebraska) or the Pac-10 (Colorado) the Big 12 will need to replace one or two schools, or shrink to 10 teams. TCU seems to be a perfect fit geographically and competitively. It doesn't hurt that TCU has tradition with several Big 12 schools as a former Southwestern Conference (SWC) member. That, however, is the exact reason I would be leery, if I were TCU, to join the Big 12. TCU was kicked to the curb while the then Texas Governor struck a deal to bind membership of one state school to the inclusion of three others. In other words, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Baylor are a package deal. If one is in they all are in, if one is out they all are out. As the last one in, TCU would be the first one out if the Big 12 ever decided another rising team (Houston, Tulsa) became more desirable in the future and rather than increase to 13 teams it wanted to stay an even 12. Then again, this is TCU, who was rejected by the other eight teams in the Mountain West Conference (MWC) ten or so years ago when they left the Western Athletic Conferenc (WAC). When the MWC came calling five years later, TCU fully embraced reuniting with the eight schools who felt they were better off without the Horned Frogs.

2. Big 10 targeting ACC or SEC schools

Everyone seems set that the Big 10 will expand with either a Big 12 North team or with a Big East team. Money seems to be the biggest reason behind this round of expansion talks, and the Big 10 seems to be on par with the SEC in that regard, even if the performance on the field has not reflected it. Isn't there a middle of the pack SEC team that would provide just as much added revenue as Missouri or Pitt and would also want to go to the Big 10 to compete better in football? Kentucky would help Big 10 basketball and Kentucky football might fare better in the Big 10. It is also situated nicely geographically. What about Boston College from the ACC? Huge media market, and no strong roots in the ACC. Georgia Tech? The Yellow Jacket's big rival (Georgia) is already in a different conference, and the Atlanta media market would be a nice catch.

3. The Impact on the BCS

Lost in all of the conference expansions and realignments is how this impacts the "solid" foundation of the BCS. The BCS formed itself on the premise that the best football teams were in the ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, and Pac-10. The ACC and Big East realignments last decade resulted in three teams (Louisville, Cincinnati, and South Florida) that were originally considered outsiders to become insiders. By the time this potentially catacalysmic round of conference expansion finishes we could have another three teams "promoted" to the BCS level. Who says that these six teams (the former three and the hypothetical future three) were the most deserving? It is unfair if a team like Boise State is left out of automatic qualification status, but a team like South Florida gains automatic qualification status. Boise State has done everything in its control (win on the field), but South Florida has all the uncontrolable variables (location, media market). Conferences expand for money, but the BCS was designed, on the surface, to get the top two teams to play each other. With a new composition, who says the Big 10, Big 12, Pac-10, ACC, SEC, and Big East of 2012 will be worthy of the automatic qualification status they gained in 1998? The BCS should be null and void and a new system put in place after the conference expansions conclude, unless, like conference expansions, the BCS is really all about money.

NEW HEAD COACH IN WAITING RULE

I saw the story about a new recruiting rule that assistant coaches designated as the head coach in waiting are subject to the same recruiting restrictions as head coaches. The most notable restriction is the head coach can make only one in house visit to a recruit.

This has conspiracy written all over it. What evidence was presented to prove that this was a distinct recruiting advantage? What study was done that shows that high school recruits choose a school based on how long the coach will be there? Coaches change schools so fast now that most high school students probably expect a coaching change while they are at their school. Is there evidence that assistant coaches were using the head coach in waiting label as a successful recruiting tactic? Texas and Maryland are the only schools with designated head coaches in waiting. I don't think anyone is worried about Maryland, but Texas is a perennial power. Something tells me that having a head coach in waiting is not what made the Longhorns so good.

I understood that schools used the head coach in waiting designation as an attempt to secure a good assistant coach, but that coach is still free to leave and coach another school. Do the contracts for these assistant coaches penalize them if they leave to coach another school?

Texas and Maryland have united to fight this case and they will use ex post facto laws to defend themselves. I think on those grounds alone they will win. I think the rule could get wipped out of the books if someone demands answers to the questions I just asked, because I don't think the evidence exists to support such a rule.

OFF SEASON WORKOUTS

I know it is now the college football off season, but I am back training for the next year. Train with me as I cover the hot issues of college football, like conference expansion (see below), as well as spring training, the NFL combine and draft (other outlets consider this NFL news, but until the college stars suit up for NFL teams I still consider them part of college football), and all the other unforeseen stories that will arise in the next six months as we gear up for a new decade of the best sport on earth.

I have added some new features. You can now email a link to each post by clicking on the envelop icon at the end of each post. You can also subscribe to email notifications whenever I make a new post. To subscribe use the "Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)" link at the bottom of this page, or email me at collegefootballhaven12@gmail.com to be added to the email list.

As for coverage on BYU football, I have created a new blog where I will post content about BYU. That blog address is byufootballtalk.blogspot.com. Go there now to read my thoughts about BYU and Pac-10 expansion and Max Hall in the NFL draft. You can also vote in a poll about the upcoming NFL draft. I am also continuing to write about BYU football on isportsweb.com.

For anyone interested, I am now offering authorship opportunities to others to provide alternative perspectives and more expansive coverage. If you are interested, please email collegefootballhaven12@gmail.com with a sample of your writing and any areas of interest (recruiting, a specific team, etc.).

END THE PAROCHIALISM OF COLLEGE CONFERENCES

College sports have thrived under the organizational structure of conference for several decades now. These conferences have created identities through the years, which, in many cases, involves the geographical location of the schools in the conference. The Atlantic Coast Conference, Mid-America Conference, Southeastern Conference, and Pacific 10 Conference all refer to specific regions of the country.

From time to time, these conferences have grown in size by incorporating additional teams. Currently, the Big 10 and the Pac-10 conferences have expressed an interest in growing. Ask any “expert” on the subject of conference expansion and he or she will tell you that expansion consists of many factors in addition to the regional location aspect already mentioned. Academics (admission standards, research accreditation) and athletic competitiveness in all sports, and money are some of the bigger issues.

I have been reading about the possible conference expansions and all this rhetoric about academics and water polo being as important as football brings one word to mind: parochial. I don’t expect anything different since educating America’s brightest young minds should be the primary goal of colleges and universities, but let’s be honest with ourselves. When expansion is announced where does it make headlines and generate endless discussion and debate? College football media outlets. Football is the driving force behind all expansion. I graduated from a school that is a member of the Mountain West Conference (MWC), but we never competed academically with other MWC schools. The chemistry department did not have trivia bowls with conference rivals. The English department did not meet on weekends to have essay write offs with other MWC member schools. Maybe it looks good for recruiting after a down year or it helps with those conference advertising spots during athletic events when your team is losing by 30 points to be able to promote a strong academic resume, but people rarely associate athletics and academics in college sports. Conference alignment pertains to sports and sports only, and even then, conference alignment is flexible. The smaller sports like lacrosse and wrestling are not sanctioned by all schools, so some schools compete in one conference for the small sports and another conference for the big sports.

It is time to revamp the conference structure we have come to know in college sports. We need conferences that are assembled based more on competitiveness. It is time to kick out teams like Vanderbilt, Baylor, Iowa State, Duke, Maryland, Kansas, Mississippi State, Washington State, and Indiana who show little commitment to football and field a competitive team once a generation, and let teams like Boise State, BYU, Utah, and TCU replace them.

GAME RECAP: BYU vs. Utah

The game recap for the BYU-Utah game is now posted at www.isportsweb.com.

GAME DAY TALK

Let's get it going. Today should be a great day. Rivalries are already making things interesting. Pitt just lost to rival West Virginia last night, while Alabama and Texas were taken to the wire against their rivals. What will happen today? This is must see TV.

GAME PREVIEW: BYU vs. Utah

The game preview for BYU vs. Utah is posted on http://www.isportsweb.com/. Check it out to see what I will be watching for and what other story lines have caught my interest If you have not been to that sight lately, take a good look at the other posts. I have made several this week.

Let me address some specific questions from you who follow the blog that I was unable to work into the post on isportsweb. No, Utah does not have the right personnel to stretch BYU to the breaking point. I think BYU is in complete control whether they win this game and by how much. That isn't to say that Utah does not have talented player who will put up a fight, but if BYU executes well then BYU will get their points and the Utah offense will struggle with an inexperienced quarterback, whether it is Terrence Cain or Jordan Wynn. I don't consider the Utah passing game aggressive. They rely on a solid run game and use the pass to keep teams honest, and with this year's quarterbacks, the run definitely comes first with Utah. Yes, I think BYU will excute well enough to win, and I just might get what we have not had yet this century, a big BYU win. All four of our wins have been fourth quarter comebacks, while Utah has had two blowouts this decade.

PERSPECTIVE: BCS list of teams still under consideration

NOTE: A similar post can be found at http://www.isportsweb.com/ on the BYU Football page.

The BCS released earlier this week a list of 20 teams still under consideration for the nine remaining BCS bowl positions. Ohio State has already secured a Rose Bowl spot as the Big 10 Champion. The list included the following teams:

Clemson, Georgia Tech, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Nebraska, Texas, Oregon, Oregon State, Florida, Alabama, Boise State, BYU, Iowa, LSU, Miami (FL), Oklahoma State, Penn State, USC, TCU, and Virginia Tech.

The first 10 teams are obvious since they can gain an automatic berth by winning their conference championship. It is the second 10 that is perplexing. TCU and Boise State are givens to be on this list, since they are in the top 6 and undefeated. Iowa, Penn State, and Oklahoma State are understandable; they are the next best teams from conferences that have an automatic berth for their champions. However, the rational and common sense starts to get fuzzy with LSU, Miami (FL), USC, and Virginia Tech. Each school has three losses, and no team with three losses, except for Illinois in 2007 as Ohio State's replacement in the Rose Bowl, has ever played in a BCS bowl game. The BCS could really get itself into trouble if one of these three loss teams is invited while an undefeated Boise State is not. I don't know what could be better evidence that the BCS is unfair and that money comes first in the BCS.

The final team on the list is BYU. This is the one that puzzles me the most. Why is BYU on the list? Yes, the Cougars can still meet the minimum requirements to qualify for a BCS bowl invite, that is nine wins and a top 14 ranking in the BCS standings, but with TCU and Boise State well ahead of BYU in the standings, why would a third member of a non-automatic qualifying conference still be under consideration? Was it that opening day win against Oklahoma? Furthermore, if 9-2 BYU is still BCS worthy, why not BYU's opponent this week, 9-2 Utah. Utah, just like BYU, has a loss to TCU, number 4 in the BCS. The only other loss for Utah came on the road at Oregon, another team on the verge of clinching a BCS bowl bid. Utah did, after all, win the Sugar Bowl just last year. Haven't the Utes established themselves as a BCS worthy program with a 2-0 record in BCS bowls?

The first explanation I can offer is that this is all politics. For the BCS to appear equitable it needs to show that schools from conferences without automatic bids for their champion have the same chance to get a BCS invite as any non-champion from those conferences with an automatic bid for their champion. This reminds me of 1996 when then BYU head coach LaVell Edwards was invited to the selection show for the Bowl Alliance, the precursor to the BCS. In 1996, BYU was the third highest ranked team available for the six alliance bowl spots, and the highest ranked team that was not guaranteed a spot as a conference champion. BYU was not invited to play in one of the Bowl Alliance games and having Edwards present was merely a gesture to make the Alliance appear to be an equitable system. In reality, BYU will not be invited to play in a BCS bowl, even if every team with two or three losses loses again and Boise State and one of the undefeated SEC teams lose their two remaining games. The BCS just won't let it happen. My second explanation is that BYU is the next highest rated team after TCU and Boise State from a conference that does not have an automatic bid for its conference champion. In their effort to appear fair, the BCS just did the simplest thing. That is why it was BYU and not Utah. My third explanation is that BYU was the second team from the Mountain West Conference on the list. The BCS bylaws prohibit a conference from having more than two participants in BCS bowls. Maybe if Utah was in the Western Athletic Conference or some other conference the Utes would have made the list, but since they are below BYU in the standings and in the same conference as BYU and TCU, Utah was left off.

In the end, I find one other question more pertinent than all others. Why does the BCS put out this list? There is still a lot of football left to play. The changes that can occur, and have occurred in the past, in the BCS standings can propel a team to the forefront of discussion that is out of the picture now. Why open yourself up for more criticism and controversy? Just let the games be played and tabulate the final BCS standings and make the selections from those results.

HEISMAN HOPEFULS, WEEK 12

The pack is thinning. This week I am cutting Ryan Matthews and Dion Lewis from the list. Lewis is having a phenomenal freshman season, but I don't feel he is playing at the same level as the other running backs. The concussion that Matthews sustained last week kept him out of action this week, and that is hurting him. For him to really have had a chance, he needed to play very well in every game. As for the remaining three candidates, they are all neck and neck. Toby Gerhart has turned into a touchdown machine with seven in the last two weeks, but Stanford's loss to Cal does hurt him slightly. Case Keenum rebounded beautifully from last week's loss. Mark Ingram is doing the best he can with the limited number of touches that he is getting. He could be the clear cut leader if he could get his hands on the ball more often. No one can afford to slip up now.

Case Keenum, Houston, 29 completions, 39 attempts, 405 yards, 5TD (387-553, 4599, 36 TD, 6 INT, 3 rush TD)

Toby Gerhart, Stanford, 20-136, 4 TD (282-1531, 23 TD)

Mark Ingram, Alabama, 11-102, 2 TD (205-1399, 12 TD, 3 rec TD)

Dion Lewis, Pittsburgh, DID NOT PLAY--BYE (203-1291, 13 TD, 1 rec TD)--WILL NOT CONTINUE TO TRACK

Ryan Matthews, Fresno State, DID NOT PLAY--INJURED (213-1491, 14 TD)--WILL NOT CONTINUE TO TRACK

REMEMBERING THE RIVALRY

As a special feature for www.isportsweb.com, each day this week I will highlight a game from the BYU-Utah series. Today is 1989, 20 years ago. Don't miss it.

POLL RESULTS

You were right with the poll this week. LSU vs. Ole Miss received 57 percent of the vote, and sure enough, Ole Miss pulled off the upset. Oregon vs. Arizona received 28 percent, and that game nearly ended in an upset, too. An Oregon touchdown with less than 30 seconds left to force overtime game Oregon the extra time it needed to beat a tough Arizona team. Don't forget to vote in this week's poll: Which rivalry do you enjoy the most?

REACTION TO THE RANKINGS

My reaction to BYU's spot in the rankings is posted at www.isportsweb.com. Check it out and see if you agree.

TOP 25, WEEK 12

After rewarding Rutgers and Stanford with significant jumps in the rankings last week, they showed me they did not care for my respect as they lost their respective games. Rutgers was pummelled by Syracuse, and Stanford lost to its rival. Both fell from the rankings. They may make it back into the final rankings, but at this point they are on the outside looking in. Everyone in the top 12 either won or was idle, so no changes there. I was poised to move Temple up significantly to number 14, but after I saw the results of Rutgers and Stanford following their big leaps, I kept them at a more modest 17 (the lowest ranked 2 loss team). I have joined the Temple bandwagon and want to see them keep winning, so I did not want to jinx them with an 8-3 Ohio team on the schedule this week for a chance to play Central Michigan in the Mid-American Conference (MAC) Championship game. Therefore, Central Michigan and Temple swapped spots. I have to say my favorite part of doing the rankings this week was dropping LSU out following its loss to Ole Miss. I think I am getting too much gratification over LSU's misfortunes, but I don't think unranked status is too harsh of a punishment. There are many other quality three-loss teams. With rivalries getting into full swing next week, we may see more major shake ups in the rankings. Stay tuned.

1. TCU (11-0)

2. Cincinnati (10-0)

3. Alabama (11-0)

3. Texas (11-0)

5. Florida (11-0)

6. Boise State (11-0)

7. Georgia Tech (10-1)

8. Pittsburgh (9-1)

9. Oregon (9-2)

10. Ohio State (10-2)

11. Houston (9-2)

12. Iowa (10-2)

13. Penn State (10-2)

14. Central Michigan (9-2)

15. Oklahoma State (9-2)

16. Utah (9-2)

17. Temple (9-2)

18. Clemson (8-3)

19. North Carolina (8-3)

20. Wisconsin (8-3)

21. Navy (8-3)

22. Nevada (8-3)

23. Nebraska (8-3)

24. Oregon State (8-3)

25. Ole Miss (8-3)

OTHERS TO WATCH: Troy, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Miami (FL), USC, Boston College, LSU, Rutgers, Stanford

GAME RECAP: BYU vs. Air Force

You can view the game recap for the BYU vs. Air Force game at: http://isportsweb.com/sport/college-football/mountain-west/byu-football/ Be sure to visit www.isportsweb.com regularly next week as I will make a special post each day in honor of the BYU vs. Utah rivalry with flashbacks for some of the rivalries greatest games.

GAME DAY TALK

It is Rivalry Week, part 1. Michigan vs. Ohio State highlights this week's rivalries. We also have games that will decide or clear up the races for conference titles. Oregon vs. Arizona and Stanford vs. Cal can go a long ways to decide who represents the Pac-10 in the Rose Bowl. Nebraska vs. Kansas State is for the Big 12 North Division title. What other games do you have your eye on?

GAME PREVIEW: BYU vs. Air Force

The game preview for BYU vs. Air Force has been posted on www.isportsweb.com. Check it out and leave some additional things to watch for in this game.

HEISMAN HOPEFULS, WEEK 11

I think it is time to let go of Jimmy Clausen. He made great improvements this year and is a fine quarterback, but he is not on the Heisman Trophy level. Case Keenum was my front runner going into the weekend, but he was less than outstanding in the loss to Central Florida. Toby Gerhart has surged to the front now. He has amassed 401 yards and 6 touchdowns the last two weeks against Oregon and USC. Ryan Matthews suffered a concussion and missed most of his game this week against Nevada. He expects to play this week. If he can't bounce back with huge games the last two weeks, he may be dropped, despite leading the nation in rushing.

Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame, 27 completions, 42 attempts, 283 yards, 1TD, 1 INT, 1 rush TD (236-350, 3053, 21 TD, 4 INT, 2 rush TD)-WILL NOT CONTINUE TO TRACK

Case Keenum, Houston, 33-56, 377, 3 TD, 1 INT (358-514, 4194, 31 TD, 6 INT, 3 rush TD)

Toby Gerhart, Stanford, 29-178, 3 TD (262-1395, 19 TD)

Mark Ingram, Alabama, 19-149, 2 TD (175-1297, 10 TD, 3 rec TD)

Dion Lewis, Pittsburgh, 21-152, 1 TD (203-1291, 13 TD, 1 rec TD)

Ryan Matthews, Fresno State, 8-32 (213-1491, 14 TD)

POLL RESULTS

The second poll has closed, and Oregon was voted as the best 2 loss team, with 50 percent of the vote. Thanks to all who participated. Don't forget to vote in this week's poll question: Which ranked team is most likely to lose this weekend?