College Football - Week 11
 

Pretty down week of games, though a couple that intrigue me:

San Diego State vs TCU

- SDSU is 7-2 and looking good. Brady Hoke is without question on any Michigan HC short list, though RR is likelier to stay.

South Carolina vs Florida

- Spurrier vs UF is always fun

Alabama vs Miss. State

- Dan Mullen is a rising star as a HC. Bama should win easy but they could letdown after last week.

You forgot the Toledo Rockets vs N. Illinois, a game that could decide that fate of the MAC West!

Georgia vs. Auburn.
Penn State vs. Ohio State.
Kansas St. vs. Missouri.
VT vs. UNC.
TA&M vs. Baylor.

Also have potential as good games.

Iowa is on upset alert. We travel to Northwestern. And without a doubt Coach Fitz will have them ready to beat down the Hawks. Always a tough game for Iowa.

I dont think Penn State stands a chance against Ohio State in the horseshoe. The Buckeyes will expose the PSU defense and put up at least 35.

I agree. PsU gets dominated.

For the first time in a decade I will not watch my Tigers play live. (either by TV or in person) as I will be away from a TV all weekend, here is hoping I canlive in a bubble until Sunday night late when I watch the Clemson FSU DVR....

In a clash of former Izulde schools, Wyoming comes to play at UNLV's Homecoming.

...This might be the only other win the Rebels have a shot at this season.

Looks like Hawk is finally getting canned.

Reports: Embattled Dan Hawkins out as Colorado coach - ESPN

Man who did Cam Newton sleep with? Folks are really trying to crap on his Heisman parade.

Finally.

Something I found interesting in the article linked above about Dan Hawkins' firing:


(emphasis mine)

It boggles my mind that a bottom-feeder coach in a big-time conference is making $1.5 mil a year. I guess I'm really behind the times. I'll have to do some research sometime into what other coaches make elsewhere - including the pros (even the UFL, if I can find it).

Sorry for the interruption. Carry on.

That jumped out at me as well, so you aren't the only one. I don't see how most of these guys are worth even a fraction of that high a salary, I guess I am behind the times as well.

I think he was supposed to be the savior from Boise State that was going to turn that program around. I think the 1.5 million was spent to bring a winner not a bottom feeder.

Arkansas hosts UTEP this Saturday. What should I expect?

It is not who he slept with, it is who he is being compared to. When you starting hearing a QB that left your program (by choice or by force) being compared to Jesus Tebow, you come out with this type of stuff.

The system of colleges using public funds to pretend to educate professional athletes is so fucking stupid.

Urban Meyer is sure butthurt about Cam Newton no longer being at Florida. I mean the kid was a fuckup there so they moved on. Seems like he has grown up. Let it be.

I will note if it comes out he accepted money then fine, I agree it needs to be handled, but it is just funny that this is all basically a one man assault from Urban Meyer.

The whole SEC is full of cheaters.

I thought it was Tebow Christ.....

It is now official:

Dan Hawkins Fired at Colorado -- NCAAFB FanHouse

The D1 average last year was about 1.3 million.
56 of 120 make $1m or more, with 25 at $2m or more

College football coaches see salaries rise in down economy - USATODAY.com

BYU has to win 2 out of 3 to be bowl eligible.

With the next two games @CSU and New Mexico I would normally say it's a lock, but I don't think it will be.

I would like to see them win all 3, but our game against Utah has me pretty scared...especially after the ass raping they took from TCU.

But it's okay because Colorado has a balanced athletic budget.



If you include over seven million dollars in student fees and direct institutional support.

And it's not like coaching is some unique skill. There's hundreds of guys out there who could probably do as well or better at Colorado.

I guess there's an upper, elite level of coaches worth the money, but it's kind of hard to tell - the guys perceived as that are mostly at elite institutions and have all of the inherent advantages that go with that. It's be pretty hard for anyone to fail at Florida or Texas.

Ron Zook managed it just fine. ;)

Game starting right now!!!

Mackovich did it so much better though

So with Hawkins having coached his son the last few years, what were the NCAA rules? They do tend to frown on such things from coach to student as gifts. And students really aren't supposed to hang out at the coach's pad either. Did he have to refrain from giving his kid any gifts other than the starting QB job?

Not a fan of Doyel at all, but thought this was a good article.

Consider the source on Newton story - NCAA Football - CBSSports.com

Breaking news: Cam Newton and father admitted in phone conversations that money played a part in picking Auburn. Was just on SportsCenter.

Dun dun dunnn

Where there's smoke, there's fire...

Utah @ Notre Dame should at least be interesting. Utah isn't as bad as TCU made them look, at least on defense, thus that 5.5 point spread is probably a little low. But ND does have some talent, and hopefully some pride. While I don't like Utah per se, I do want to see TCU in the title game (assuming Oregon, or more likely Auburn, falters) so against any other team I'd be rooting for them in a blowout. Heck, given this ND team and this season I don't even think it would make me think less of them, but I still can't quite root for them outright.

I don't want to get involved in a huge Cam Newton debate when so much more will come out in the next days/weeks/years, so I'll just say my little piece. I don't think Cam himself ever asked for or received money, but I think it's quite possible that people around him (probably including his father) did. At what point does that make the player ineligible? The second part is that these allegations are not new and in fact have been known to the SEC and the NCAA for close to a year - just as in the Derrick Rose SAT situation, how can you punish a university retroactively for playing a player you yourself cleared and said was eligible at the time? Finally, it really does seem odd that ESPN and the NYT haven't changed their stories about John Bond and Kenny Rogers to reflect the fact that it is 3rd hand info at best. (Bonus points - I absolutely do believe that Urban Meyer is behind most of this - why I don't entirely know - and the scandal is almost worth it just for the material it gives EDSBS and LSUFreek.)

I think Utah wins by double digits. It's a real solid Utah team and Notre Dame is without Crist. I've watched a lot of Notre Dame this year for some reason, and they just don't have much enthusiasm. Really thought I'd see more fire from them with Kelly as coach, but they just aren't very good. Sad too since I do think they have good talent at key positions.

Is this different/updated beyond the story from a couple of hours ago that had two sources claiming that those conversations with the Newton's had taken place?

(Referenced here)
ESPN sources: SEC informed of alleged Cam Newton pay-for-play plan in January; has been OK'd to play throughout | al.com

Who says the NCAA cleared him to play? I'm sure they get all sorts of allegations and can't follow-up on them immediately (look at how the UNC stuff has unfolded). I would think it's up to the school to decide whether there's any substance to the allegations, and the NCAA moves on its investigations at its own pace. The NCAA won't rule someone ineligible until they've got proof, and in this case, it seems quite clear the investigation is just now getting started.

This really seems to boil down to how much investigation Auburn did back then (assuming they were made aware of these statements when MSU reported them - is that the protocol?). I don't give much weight to the fact that the NCAA didn't declare him ineligible before, since they are only now investigating. If they had announced that they had investigated and closed the book on it, that's one thing. Ultimately, nothing (provable) may come out of this, but depending on the extent of Auburn's investigation, they are taking a huge risk of being Reggie Bush/USC all over again.

He had to be cleared to play at some point, otherwise he wouldn't be on the field. Whether he was cleared to play in relationship to these particular claims is a different matter, although as one local sportswriter in Alabama pointed out this morning, at the very latest both the conference & the NCAA knew about these charges in July at the latest, plenty of time for them to advise Auburn not to dress him for the season opener.

I don't know, I think that just meant no one had a smoking gun that made it more likely than not he'd be ruled ineligible, if substantiated. With the UNC or AJ Green situations, there was more than enough evidence to convince them to have the players sit. Here, if all you have is a couple of statements and no hard evidence, and you haven't started the investigation yet, then you have no basis for advising the school to sit the player. I mean, you can't tell every school they should err on the side of caution based on every allegation that comes in. I don't think they are off the hook yet.

I'd be interested to know whaat Auburn did to investigate this, as they had the ability and motivation to make sure things were above-board before any NCAA investigation commenced. Could they ask for bank account info?

One thing is for certain - whatever comes of this, it has essentially soiled this season for Auburn because unless something dramatic comes out in the next 45 days or so, we won't know the answers to all of these questions until Auburn's already played in whatever bowl they make and the Heisman voting is done. So everything is going to be under the constant question of whether it's all for nothing.

Imagine a scenario where TCU ends 3rd and Oregon and Auburn play for the championship, and then a few months later Newton is declared ineligible. Wow.

Of course, I guess some would consider it to be Auburn's ultimate payback for 2004...

Aren't we looking at more like 2015 on the NCAA timetable?

I wonder if any of the BCS voters will be influenced though

Everybody is technically eligible at the time they play, otherwise they wouldn't play. If the Newton investigation was completed at the time he was "cleared", that might carry some weight, but presumably, they're trying to get to the bottom of things now. Part of that responsibility is the risk involved with recruiting dirty kids. Anyone who brought in Cam Newton this season knew they were taking a huge risk.

And I always roll my eyes at the "kid didn't know" or the "school didn't know" justifications. Whether that's true or not is irrelevant. It's your responsibility to know, otherwise you have this structure not unlike the trainer/athlete relationship in MLB ("I don't need the details, just shoot me up".) Dirty programs are built on keeping kids and head coaches out of the loop. Thats why you have boosters dealing directly with kids and their families, and gifts to parents/high school coaches/others that influence a kids decision.

The whole thing is kind of silly. The SEC in particular, followed by most of the BCS and 1-A as a whole really just needs to turn pro. I really think we're going to look back in these days with amusement, when big-time college football programs felt the need to hide all these financial arrangements, and when everyone was obsessed with pushing the myth that Newton is some kind of student-athlete.

Is it illegal to ask for money but eventually take none?

Yesterday it was reported Hoke was the latest coach contacted by Minnesota this week. No idea where he's supposed to stand on their short list after the top tier of candidates who will turn them down.

I don't know. Depends on what they find and when they find it.

The Bush thing was a post-mortem, and thus they had as much time as they wanted to take because none of it blew up until after he was gone, so there was nothing they could immediately fix or "make right." This is happening real-time, so presumably there would be a bit more urgency to the investigation. Because yeah, I could see a scenario where more and more stuff leaks out about his potentially taking money from Auburn to the point where maybe Auburn gets screwed out of a BCS Bowl game because the voters don't want to put college football in the position of having another illegitimate champion. The Heisman would be the easier issue - who cares? The BCS champion is the much bigger issue (at least IMO).

Is there another conference that comes even close to the level of bus throwing that SEC schools do to each other? I can't think of any.

I would have thought that Jeff Jagodzinski would be a pretty good candidate for that job, but I haven't heard his name associated with it.

We don't need a guy that will bolt for the NFL after two seasons.

The NCAA did a full investigation into OJ Mayo and USC still got hit for those violations. I don't think it's relevant at all whether the NCAA cleared him and when they knew about the violations. If he received any benefits at all, Auburn's season is gone. I don't think asking for benefits is illegal so Auburn needs to hope it stops there.

That being said, I'm becoming less and less convinced that Auburn is clean in this one. I basically see two realistic scenarios - 1) Miss St is making all/most of this up or 2) Auburn paid for Newton. Are we really to believe that he went from a $200,000 asking price with teams allegedly willing to pay, to playing out of the goodness of his heart in a matter of weeks? I don't buy it at all.

I agree with this, and will add that if we look at his history, character has been an ongoing issue with this guy. He tried to cheat twice with bogus papers in class, obviously he is not this stand up guy that Auburn is trying to portray.