SB Nation - Chris Harper

The North in 2010

Bill C. — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:00:31 -0000

The 2009 Big 12 North race is, to say the least, intriguing heading into November, but the way my brain works, I can't help but keep an eye on the future as all of this plays out. And since it's in my head, I might as well type it out too, huh? As November 2009 begins, let's take a look at...2010.

What we're going to do is simple: we're going to take the most recent two-deeps listed on each team's website, remove the seniors, and see what's left. Obviously there will be plenty more analysis to come, but this will be a nice, preliminary peek. I can't help myself.

Missouri

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Blaine Gabbert (Jr) Jimmy Costello (So)	DE	Jacquies Smith (Jr) Marcus Malbrough (So)
RB	Derrick Washington (Sr) De'Vion Moore (So)	DT	Dominique Hamilton (Jr) Marvin Foster (RSFr)
WR	Jerrell Jackson (Jr) Brandon Gerau (Jr)	DT	Terrell Resonno (Jr) Bart Coslet (Sr)
WR	T.J. Moe (So) Rolandis Woodland (So)	DE	Aldon Smith (So) Brad Madison (So)
WR	Wes Kemp (Jr) Michael Egnew (Jr)	WLB	Zaviar Gooden (So) Donovan Bonner (So)
TE	Andrew Jones (Jr) Beau Brinkley (Jr)	MLB	Will Ebner (Jr) Luke Lambert (Sr)
LT	Elvis Fisher (Jr) Justin Britt (RSFr)	SLB	Andrew Gachkar (Sr) Tyler Crane (Jr)
LG	Austin Wuebbels (Jr) Travis Ruth (So)	CB	Carl Gettis (Sr) Trey Hobson (Jr)
C	Tim Barnes (Sr) J.T. Beasley (Jr)	CB	Kevin Rutland (Sr) Robert Steeples (So)
RG	Jayson Palmgren (Jr) Travis Ruth (So)	FS	Jasper Simmons (Sr) Munir Prince (Sr)
RT	Dan Hoch (Jr) Jack Meiners (So)	SS	Jarrell Harrison (Sr) Kenji Jackson (Jr)

K	Grant Ressel (Jr)	P	Matt Grabner (Jr)
PR	Carl Gettis (Sr)	KR	Jasper Simmons (Sr)

I've got to say, this is the most complete team heading into 2010. Blaine Gabbert will be the most accomplished North QB heading into 2010 and Derrick Washington the second-most accomplished RB. The improved secondary will return just about everybody of importance, and a deep LB corps could be well-positioned to absorb the loss of Sean Weatherspoon with as little drop-off as possible.
Two major question marks: a) who replaces Danario Alexander, and b) who replaces Jaron Baston? Multiple candidates exist to replace Spoon, so that's actually less of a worry, but the WR situation is at least a bit worrisome. Wes Kemp has shown flashes, and if he continues to grow, he could be the deep threat this team needs, but what is it I always say? Until you actually prove it, it's a question mark. Beyond Kemp, guys like Jackson, T.J. Moe (remember him?), Rolandis Woodland, and one of the redshirting freshmen (L'Damian Washington, Jaleel Clark, Kerwin Stricker) will fill out the depth chart, and at least one of them will need to take a step forward.
Of course, you know who else could absorb the loss of Danario? Tight ends. Novel concept, I know.
I really like what I've seen out of Dominique Hamilton recently, but Terrell Resonno seems to have disappeared. Either he or one of the underclassmen (Marvin Foster, Jimmy Burge, George White) will need to raise their game. If somebody competent steps up at WR and DT, this team is loaded.

Colorado

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Tyler Hansen (Jr) Cody Hawkins (Sr)	DE	Marquez Herrod (Sr) Josh Hartigan (Jr)
RB	Rodney Stewart (Jr) Darrell Scott (Jr)	DT	Curtis Cunningham (Jr) Nate Bonsu (So)
FB	Ryan Deehan (Jr) ?	DT	Will Pericak (So) Conrad Obi (Jr)
WR	Scotty McKnight (Sr) Jason Espinoza (Jr)	DE	Forrest West (So) Nick Kasa (So)
WR	Markques Simas (Jr) Will Jefferson (So)	WLB	Jon Major (So) Tyler Ahles (Jr)
TE	Ryan Deehan? (Jr) ?	MLB	Michael Sipili (Sr) ?
LT	Nate Solder (Sr) Ryan Dannewitz (So)	SLB	B.J. Beatty (Sr) Doug Rippy (So)
LG	Ethan Adkins (Jr) Blake Behrens (Jr)	CB	Jimmy Smith (Sr) ?
C	Keenan Stevens (Sr) Mike Iltis (Jr)	CB	Jalil Brown (Sr) Arthur Jaffee (Jr)
RG	Matthew Bahr (Jr) Max Tuioti-Mariner? (So)	FS	Ray Polk (So) Anthony Perkins (Jr)
RT	Ryan Miller (Jr) Bryce Givens (So)	SS	Travis Sandersfeld (Jr) ?

K	Aric Goodman (Sr)	P	Aric Goodman (Sr)
PR	Jason Espinoza (Jr)	KR	Brian Lockridge (Jr)

I mentioned this past offseason that while Colorado was going to stink in 2009, they might actually be positioning themselves to actually fulfill the role of sleeper that has been foisted upon them for most of the last half-decade. Ironically, they might actually emerge as a sleeper just as everybody finally gives up on them.
Of course, there will still be some major question marks. You know I'm not at all impressed with Rodney "Another Short Gain By" Stewart, and while Scotty McKnight (how is he still an underclassman???) is a great possession guy, he'd be a helluva lot better as a #2 or #3 threat than a #1. Unless Markques Simas finally starts to live up to the potential everybody says he has, this team is still severely lacking at WR, and they're losing both of their top tight ends. (I'm going out of my way not to mention Darrell Scott here, as he...whatever. I have no expectations whatsoever for him at this point, and I'm going to let him surprise me.)
I really like Jimmy Smith at CB, but CU's going to be searching for some replacements in the secondary. Jalil Brown has potential, and Ray Polk is young, but depth could be an issue.
Same can be said for the LB corps. Luckily for CU, they should have a strong D-line to maybe deflect some of the concerns.
If CU really does live up to its annual sleeper reputation, it will be in the trenches, where a struggling O-line will at least have experience on its side, and the D-line could be strong. Then again, after watching CU's O-line attempt to handle MU's improving-but-not-amazing D-line, maybe returning a bunch of these guys might not be a good thing.

Iowa State

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Austen Arnaud (Sr) Jerome Tiller (So)	DE	Patrick Neal (Jr) ?
RB	Alexander Robinson (Sr) Beau Blankenship (So)	DT	Bailey Johnson (Jr) Stephen Ruempolhamer (Jr)
WR	Jake Williams (Sr) ?	DT	Austin Alburtis (Sr) ?
WR	Sedrick Johnson (Jr) ?	DE	Roosevelt Maggitt (So) Cleyon Lang (So)
WR	Josh Lenz (So) Darius Darks (Jr)	SLB	Jacob Lattimer (Jr) ?
TE	Collin Franklin (Sr) ?	MLB	Matt Tau'fo'ou (Sr) A.J. Klein (So)
LT	Kelechi Osmele (Jr) Brayden Burris (So)	WLB	Jake Knott (So) ?
LG	Alex Alvarez (Sr) Mike Bangston (So)	CB	Leonard Johnson (Jr) Jeremy Reeves (So)
C	Sean Smith (Sr) ?	CB	Jacques Washington (So) ?
RG	Ben Lamaak (Sr) Trey Baysinger (Jr)	FS	Michael O'Connell (Sr) ?
RT	Scott Haughton (Jr) Zack Spears (Jr)	SS	David Sims (Sr) Zac Sandvig (Sr)

K	Grant Mahoney (Jr)	P	?
PR	Leonard Johnson (Jr)	KR	Leonard Johnson (Jr)

So Paul Rhoads' second year in Ames will potentially see a downright strong offense and a thin, depleted, inexperienced defense. I don't want to overstate the offensive potential (the WR situation is iffy, to say the least), but ISU might have the best O-line in the North blocking for what is at least decent skill position talent.
Arnaud vs Tiller. Could be interesting to watch this competition.
Really, if ISU returned just a couple more decent playmakers on defense, I could talk myself into them being a darkhorse contender. But while I do like what Rhoads has done with the talent on hand this year, I just can't figure they'll be that great next year. They will need another year or two of Rhoads developing his own recruits before I feel a lot more comfortable about the potential of their program.

Kansas

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Kale Pick (So) ?	DE	Jake Laptad (Sr) ?
RB	Toben Opurum (So) ?	DT	Jamal Greene (Sr) ?
WR	Dezmon Briscoe?? (Sr) ?	DT	John Williams (So) Richard Johnson (Jr)
WR	Johnathan Wilson (Sr) Tertavian Ingram (Sr)	DE	Quintin Woods (Sr) ?
WR	Bradley McDougald (So) Chris Omigie (So)	SLB	Justin Springer (Sr) ?
TE	Tim Biere (Jr) Ted McNulty (Jr)	MLB	Drew Dudley (Sr) ?
LT	Tanner Hawkinson (So) Ian Wolfe (Sr)	WLB	Huldon Tharp (So) ?
LG	Brad Thorson (Sr) Carl Wilson (Sr)	CB	D.J. Beshears (So) Daymond Patterson (Jr)
C	Jeremiah Hatch (Jr) Brad Thorson (Sr)	CB	Chris Harris (Sr) Calvin Rubles (Sr)
RG	Sal Capra (Sr) Trevor Marrongelli (So)	FS	Lubbock Smith (So) ?
RT	Jeff Spikes (Jr) Michael Martinovich (Jr)	SS	Phil Strozier (Sr) ?

K	Jacob Branstetter (Sr)	P	Alonso Rojas (Sr)
PR	Daymond Patterson (Jr)	KR	Bradley McDougald (So)

So KU's biggest question mark (offensive line) will return completely intact next year, while most of the known skill position talent disappears. I listed Dez Briscoe on the two-deep above, but I've got to be honest: I'm about 92% sure he's going pro this year. His stats are ridiculous, he's got decent NFL size, he's been suspended for academic reasons, and supposedly he was tied to those football-vs-basketball brawls earlier in the year. That's not a recipe for someone who's going to go out of his way to stick around campus for another season.
Without Briscoe, I have to figure this is going to be a run-heavy offense next year. Kale Pick's got a lot to prove, but with Toben Opurum and an experienced line, they might (might) be able to rely on the run. Then again, they'll still need some sort of passing attack, and...who will be the #1 receiver? Johnathan Wilson, I guess? Color me unafraid.
I'm not even going to try to figure out if KU's D is going to be any good. They've improved recently, but they lose Darrell Stuckey and two linemen, and the depth from LB corps vanishes. I assume this will be a decent unit, and really you can start to maybe see the identity KU might be going with--defense first, run-heavy, grind it out.

Kansas State

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Carson Coffman (Sr) ?	DE	Brandon Harold (Jr) ?
RB	Daniel Thomas (Sr) ?	DT	Prizell Brown (Sr) ?
FB	Braden Wilson (So) Lucas Hamm (Sr)	DT	Raphael Guidry (Jr) ?
WR	Lamark Brown (Sr) ?	DE	Antonio Felder (Sr) Joseph Kassanavoid (So)
WR	Collin Klein (So) Chris Harper (So)	LB	Kevin Rohleder (Sr) ?
TE	Travis Tannahill (So) ?	LB	Alex Hrebec (Jr) ?
LT	Zach Hanson (Jr) ?	LB	Troy Butler (Sr) Thomas Ferguson (So)
LG	Zach Kendall (Sr) Trevor Viers (Sr)	CB	Joshua Moore (Sr) Darious Thomas (So)
C	Wade Weibert (Sr) ?	CB	Stephen Harrison (Sr) David Garrett (Jr)
RG	Kenneth Mayfield (Sr) Colten Freeze (Jr)	FS	Emmanuel Lamur (Jr) ?
RT	Clyde Aufner (Jr) Ethan Douglas (So)	SS	Tysyn Hartman (Jr) Torrell Miller (So)

K	Josh Cherry (Sr)	P	Ryan Doerr (So)
PR	Tysyn Hartman (Jr)	KR	Daniel Thomas (Sr)

Like Kansas, this looks to be a pretty run-heavy, can't-pass-on-them team, with Daniel Thomas running behind a super-experienced line and a well-coached defense that is iffy in the front seven but stout in the secondary. In other words, this looks like a Bill Snyder team (sans the All-American linebackers). We've made a big deal out of the fact that they're losing about 35 seniors this year (and that's only a slight exaggeration), and that will absolutely murder their depth, but if they stay reasonably healthy, the Snyder identity might be able to take shape a bit more.
Now, I say they'll have a good secondary...I'm still unsure about how good the secondary is now, but returning all four current starters certainly suggests decent improvement for next year.
I believe I heard that Chris Harper is moving to WR instead of competing at QB, right?

Nebraska

Projected 2010 Depth Chart
QB	Cody Green (So) Zac Lee (Sr)	DE	Cameron Meredith (So) Josh Williams (So)
RB	Roy Helu, Jr. (Sr) Rex Burkhead (So)	DT	Baker Steinkuhler (So) Terrence Moore (Jr)
FB	Tyler Legate (So) Mike Hays (Jr)	DT	Jared Crick (Jr) ?
WR	Niles Paul (Sr) Antonio Bell (So)	DE	Pierre Allen (Sr) ?
WR	Curenski Gilleylen (Jr) Khiry Cooper (So)	Will	Blake Lawrence (Sr) Matthew May (Jr)
TE	Mike McNeill (Sr) Dreu Young (Sr)	Mike	Will Compton (So) Micah Kreikemeier (So)
LT	Mike Smith (Sr) ?	Buck	Sean Fisher (So) Eric Martin (So)
LG	Keith Williams (Sr) ?	CB	Prince Amukamara (Sr) Dejon Gomes (Sr)
C	Mike Caputo (Jr) ?	CB	Anthony West (Sr) Alfonzo Dennard (Jr)
RG	Ricky Henry (Sr) ?	FS	Eric Hagg (Sr) Austin Cassidy (Jr)
RT	Marcel Jones (Jr) D.J. Jones (Sr)	SS	P.J. Smith (So) Courtney Osborne (So)

K	Alex Henery (Sr)	P	Alex Henery (Sr)
PR	Niles Paul (Sr)	KR	Niles Paul (Sr)

How the hell is Pierre Allen still an underclassman? I was completely convinced that both he and Barry Turner were seniors, but I guess not.
Next question: how much of Nebraska's defensive identity is grounded in Ndamukong Suh? He and Turner depart, but will Allen and the stout Jared Crick be able to keep the great D-line play coming? And how much of Crick's success is due to offenses' fear of Suh?
The shine is quickly wearing off of Roy Helu, Jr., but he does return next year (lord knows he's not going pro), and with yet another experienced O-line, NU should be able to run the ball pretty well. That will obviously take some pressure off of Cody Green if Green is not, after all, ready to be NU's savior.
I really like what NU has returning at CB, but...safety? I think I like their second-string CBs more than their first string safeties. Will be interesting to see if there's some position shifting when all is said and done.

As a Missouri fan, I look at this information and quickly conclude that Missouri will be the 2010 favorite, and really I'd say I have pretty good basis in fact for that opinion. That said, Nebraska is intriguing, and even though K-State is not a stat-friendly team (I've already accepted that they're better than the stats say--I just can't figure out how much better), Bill Snyder really might get them back into the hunt despite the youth and lack of depth. Colorado could be interesting depending on who the head coach is (ahem), Kansas has recruited well and will see plenty of talented-but-young players hitting the field, and Iowa State might have the best offensive line in the division. I'd like to think Missouri might run away with this thing, and I'm sure it could happen (the trip to Lincoln aside), but with five of six North teams (all but Kansas) looking potentially better next year than this year, we might have another fun race on our hands.

Q & A With Bring On The Cats

Beergut — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:44:55 -0000

As we will try to do with the other SB Nation blogs of opponents we face this year, we exchanged questions with Bring On The Cats, the Kansas St Wildcats blog here on SB Nation. Thanks to TB for answering our questions.

1. Who will be your starting QB on Saturday? Should we expect to see Gregory start, as he has against Iowa State and Texas Tech, or do you think Coffman will get the nod?

Your guess is as good as mine. As usual, Bill Snyder is playing it close to the vest. It will probably depend on who has a better week of practice, and with K-State practices closed to the public as per the usual routine, we won't know unless word leaks. My gut tells me Carson Coffman will start, but that's nothing more than a hunch based on the fact that he replaced Grant Gregory last week and didn't fall flat on his face.

2. Is there a hotshot QB recruit headed to Manhattan who will take over next year? I realize the desire to win now, but I'm kind of surprised that Snyder isn't building for the future by going with Coffman.

There are several targets. Every K-State fan has junior college prospect Cam Newton on the top of their wish list for next season. Ordinarily I would agree that it doesn't make sense to play a sixth-year senior (Gregory) when you have a guy in Coffman who will be around a few more years. However, I don't think Coffman is our long-term answer, either, so we need to hope to land a good recruit. We thought we were in good shape when Wichita native Chris Harper transferred back, but the rumor now is that he will be moved to wide receiver rather than playing quarterback.

3. Brandon Banks and Daniel Thomas seem to be your biggest gamebreakers on offense. Is there someone else on offense we should watch out for?

I hope to see our 4-2-5 back on the field. For some unknown reason, we basically switched to a 3-4 attack last week against Tech, with predictably disastrous results. Vic Koenning and Chris Cosh switched the defensive alignment to the 4-2-5 this season specifically to counter spread offenses. I'm not sure why they went away from it against Tech, but I would expect to see it back the rest of the year after the debacle in Lubbock.

5. Jeff Fitzgerald looks like your best pass rusher, and with our issues at LT, looks like we should be concerned about him. Who else should we watch for on your defense?

If he's healthy, Brandon Harold at defensive end. He saw his first action of the season last week against Tech, although his time was limited and he may have reinjured himself. If both Fitzgerald and Harold are playing, I have some confidence that we can take advantage of Texas A&M's biggest weakness, which is obviously offensive line play. It's really our only hope at winning this game.

6. Whenever Snyder decides to retire again, can you see him taking a job as athletic director, ala Tom Osborne at Nebraska? It would seem to be a good move to regain the trust in your athletic department lost in the Ron Prince secret agreement snafu.

I don't really see that happening. The new athletic director, John Currie, has been a resounding success thus far with the K-State faithful. We will probably see Snyder stick around Manhattan like he did last time in somewhat of an advisory role, but unless things go south with Currie, I doubt we'll see Snyder as A.D.

7. Long term, what is your projection for a rebuilding schedule for your program? Winning season and bowl next year? Compete for the North division title in '11?

If we thought this year was tough, we could be in for a real wakeup call next year. At the end of this season, we lose 30+ players thanks to the great Ron Prince juco experiment two years ago. It's going to take a big recruiting class this year to make progress toward healing that wound. Plus, if we don't land a big-time quarterback prospect, we're not going to be in any better shape on offense than we are this year.

Farther down the road, I can see things starting to look up in 2011 or 2012, if this coaching staff stays intact and makes the incremental improvements that have been Snyder's hallmark over the years. Of course, that all assumes that Snyder sticks around for three, four, or five years, which isn't a given.

8. What is your score prediction for this game?

It's hard to say. If our defense recovers from last week's faceplant against Tech, and our defensive line can get pressure on Jerrod Johnson, I could see us hanging in there and winning a 24-21 type of game. Of course, if none of that happens and Texas A&M goes up two scores in the first quarter, it could be ugly like last week. I'm not too optimistic about this one.

Aggies 35, Wildcats 21

Go look at Bring On The Cats to see my answers to their questions about Texas A&M.

Clearing Up Some Misconceptions and Looking Toward the Future of Big 12 "TV"

TB — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:00:21 -0000

Seasoned BOTC readers know that discussing Big 12 policy is as big of a topic here as actual on-field action. Maybe that would be different if we were operating this blog circa 1998-2003, when there was a ton to brag about and analyzing every single detail would be interesting. As it stands, I doubt any of you care to hear a detailed analysis of whether we can expect significant improvement out of our linebackers or whether next year's recruits will contribute at that position. Feel free to let me know if I'm wrong in the comments.

Anyway, last week I ran across this interesting post from the Texas blog Barking Carnival, home of the best team previews you'll find. As you'll see in reading it, and the associated comments, the topic was the Big 12 TV contract and other associated issues, topics we have discussed not infrequently here.

The author's essential premise is that the Big 12 contract is bad because our mid-level games don't stack up with mid-level games from the Big 10 and SEC, the two conferences with the best TV contracts in college football. It's an interesting point, and unfortunately it wasn't further developed by the author beyond looking at a relatively small sample size of Big 12 games.

As part of the potential solution, TaylorTRoom proposes as follows:

What does the Big 12 need to do to get better TV contracts? For one, it could schedule better non-conference games. I know that several teams (TT, KSU, and KU in particular) have openly adopted a strategy of playing creampuffs in non-conference, in order to ensure reaching the 6 win threshold for a bowl invitation. Some Big 12 schools play a D-1AA team every year! They have to understand that in doing so they are giving up potential guaranteed TV contract money in order to gain speculative bowl money. These programs have no right to complain about lack of TV revenue from football.

Several aspects of this deserve a response.

In other words, teams like Texas Tech, K-State and KU need to schedule better non-conference games to raise the league's profile and help land a fatter TV contract. This hearkens back to the discussion Tim Griffin and I had about playing Thursday night games at places like K-State, Tech and Oklahoma State.

To be blunt, it makes no sense for K-State to schedule up right now. Nobody at Texas is going to get very far with any K-State fan or administrator by telling them that K-State is part of the problem when Texas' athletic department revenues are more than double K-State's. Given that the Big 12 shares its TV money unevenly, in large part because Texas wanted it that way, schools outside the Big 12's financial big four -- Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Nebraska -- are probably not going to budge on any of these issues* until the big-money schools make a concession. That concession is going to be equal revenue sharing. It's a negotiation. Nothing is going to get done until both sides realize that they may have to give up something to get something from the other side.

* Colorado is the exception, because they have decided that they will chase the money by playing big-name opponents in the non-conference or playing mid-tier teams on Thursday or Friday nights. It's really working out well for them. Mostly, they get to watch their team lose on national TV and they still don't have enough money to buy out their coach's contract.

Now of course, the average Texas fan will probably read that and wonder why it doesn't make sense for K-State to schedule up, although UT's non-conference schedule the last few years has itself been seriously lacking. There are several reasons. At K-State, football is the engine that drives the entire athletic department. Men's basketball is contributing some revenue now, but every other sport in this athletic department is funded largely by the football revenue.

A big part of that revenue is the gate from home games. Despite Gene Claude's argument in the comments, I think it makes perfect sense to schedule as many home games as possible, even if you do have to dredge the Sun Belt for those teams. Scheduling home games is guaranteed revenue. Scheduling four wins in the non-conference gives you a great chance to make a bowl game, although that's not always a money-maker these days. I'll take the guaranteed gate, the potential bowl revenue, and the added practice time over a potential TV payout that ranged from as little as $50,000 for a game on Versus, to $150-300,000 for a game on FSN or ESPN, to $260,000 for a conference game on ABC and $520,000 for a non-conference game on ABC (source).

Texas fans may again miss the point on this, because they'll likely ask "Why can't you schedule home games against big-name teams?" The answer is that our stadium holds only 50,000 and we are two hours from a major airport. Teams like Florida, LSU and Ohio State are not going to schedule a home-and-home with K-State, because there's no incentive. They won't make any real money from it, and they risk a loss (OK, probably not) on the road to a team that hasn't been very good for the past five years. It's been the long-standing policy of the K-State athletic department not to schedule two-for-one series with anybody, mostly because it doesn't make financial sense. We need a bare minimum of six home games each year, and seven or eight would be preferable. We can't go scheduling two-for-ones all the time and give up home games.

Further, college football provides no incentive to schedule difficult non-conference games. In the Big 12, you're almost guaranteed at least two games per year against highly ranked teams, given that Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska are traditionally ranked, and over the conference's history, schools such as K-State, Colorado, KU, Mizzou, Texas Tech and Texas A&M have had at least one or two seasons where they ascended into the top five. If you win your non-conference games in the Big 12 and run your conference schedule, you'll play for a national title. Even if that's beyond your usual goals, you can have a big season against a weak non-conference schedule. See, e.g., KU in 2007, Texas Tech in 2008.

At several points in the post, the discussion turns to whether the Big 12 is sufficiently unified to make changes like that. The answer, unfortunately, is probably not. Unlike other conferences, the Big 12 was sort of a Vegas marriage of convenience for the parties involved, rather than a piecemeal addition of teams over time. Then, when it came time to negotiate the conference's bylaws and rules, the participants got off to an acrimonious start, with Nebraska and Texas fighting over partial qualifiers and a conference championship game.

Before we get to the point about looking to the future, a few grievances are going to be aired. First, I'm tired of Texas fans acting like most of the rest of the Big 12 doesn't care about academics. Some Texas fans like to point to the Big 10 and extoll its virtuous elevation of academics. In the comments, the author even goes so far as to say the following:

Street agents, partial qualifiers – the Big 10 doesn’t condone any of them. I wish the Big 12 were more that way.

That statement is utterly false. The Big 10 places no limits on the number of partial qualifiers its member institutions can admit. If Michigan wants to make accomodations for a bunch of partial qualifiers, it is free to do so under the Big 10's rules.

It's also disappointing to read comments like the following one made by the author:

Missouri is a member of the AAU, as is Texas, TAMU, CU, NU, and KU. These are all schools with serious goals as universities. I wish the Big 12 were more like the Big 10, where all of the schools value their institutional reputation more than they value athletic success (well, maybe the Buckeyes don’t).

To put it simply, this is an elitist statement of the highest regard. Apparently, only members of the prestigious AAU can have serious goals as a university. It's simply not possible for a smallish, rural, land-grant institution, like K-State, to serve the goal of providing an affordable education to the citizens of Kansas. No, by the logic of this statement, if you don't have "serious goals as [a] universit[y]" you are just admitting a bunch of marginal students for no reason other than obtaining athletic success. Whatever some people from schools like UT think, the goal of every institution simply cannot be to conform to someone else's concept of what constitutes academic excellence. You can go to K-State and be successful. I know K-State grads who are architects in Denver, Dallas and St. Louis. Plenty of engineers in Houston and Dallas are K-State alums. K-State-educated farmers feed the world. A K-State grad was the president of Shell Oil and founded Citizens for Affordable Energy. What's even funnier about it is that an alleged academic wasteland such as K-State, with less than half the number of students UT has, is outpacing UT in the last 20 years in producing winners of prestigious scholarships.

Implicit in the statement above is that the schools mentioned really care about academics and would never sacrifice those ideals for a little on-field success. However, this chart from the Indianapolis Star shows that statement is not accurate for a couple of those Big 12 schools. In the 2003-04 season at Missouri, 61 percent of the football players were "special admits" to the university (i.e., they didn't meet the normal entrance requirements but were admitted based on a special talent, or some similar criteria). Was 61 percent of the MU student body special admits? Uhh, no, that number would be nine percent. It was even worse at Texas A&M. In 2004-05, special admits constituted 94 percent of the Texas A&M football team, while the entire student body was only eight percent special admits. The point is that I will not sit here and be lectured about sacrificing academic ideals for athletic success when it's clear that some of the "prestigious" Big 12 universities do exactly that. K-State doesn't have lower entrance requirements than Texas because it wants to win football games, it has them because it has a different mission than Texas has. Texas strives to conform to the AAU's ideals regarding what constitutes an excellent academic institution. K-State strives to provide an education and, correspondingly, a better future to as many people as are willing to pay their tuition and give college a shot.

Along with the above broadside regarding academics at the Big 12's non-AAU schools, TaylorTRoom notes the fractured nature of the Big 12:

Texas doesn’t know that about the Big 12. After the last couple of years, with the tie-breaker vote, the BCS votes, KSU working with Brian Butler, it has to wonder if one of the goals of the Big 12 is to hold it down. UT knows that when talking about media revenue, the Big 12 needs it more than it needs the Big 12.

We've discussed the Big 12's fifth criteria for breaking a three-way divisional tie over here ad nauseum. The short answer is that Texas got screwed, but no more screwed than Texas Tech did, and no more screwed than Oklahoma would have been had they lost the tiebreaker. There is no good way to break a three-way tie when you're down to the fifth tiebreaker, and no, the SEC's tiebreaker is absolutely not better. Moving on.

I don't have a clue what the author means by K-State working with Brian Butler. We have never landed a recruit that Butler "works with." Arthur Brown went to Miami, Bryce Brown went to Tennessee, and Chris Harper went to Oregon before transferring to K-State this year. Have we recruited these guys? Hell yes, we have. We'd be morons not to try. Our school is in a state of less than three million people, and produces only a handful of FBS-ready recruits each year. If Brian Butler were in Houston and had five or six recruits, Texas could tell him to hit the road because there are hundreds of other high schoolers that are available. Further, I defy the author to show me any proof of even one NCAA violation K-State has committed while recruiting a Brian Butler athlete. It's easy to lob accusations of cheating around with no backup. I could sit here and say that Texas must be cheating because they have $100 million in athletic department revenue each year and there are only so many Godzillatrons you can buy and the money has to go somewhere, but without any support for those types of accusations, I'd lose all my credibility, if I even have any to start with. Anyway, if the author really thinks that we are gaining some big edge on Texas by recruiting athletes out of Wichita, well, I guess I don't even really know what to say to that. On the other hand, the fact that we have pretty much owned Texas lately may justifiably lead a Longhorn fan to look for any way to cut down K-State's success.

Before you go thinking that I think this author is an idiot -- I don't, by the way, I just happen to disagree with him on some points -- he makes some good points in the article and the comments that are worth exploring.

For another, the Big 12 could take a page from the SEC playbook and schedule earlier conference games. The SEC has plenty of non-conference creampuffs, but they also have league games in the season’s second week. Sure, it’s a risk for a team trying to work out the kinks in the early season, but life is full of such tradeoffs.

In the Big 12 Roundtable, we discussed whether this was a good idea. If the Big 12 wants to move to something like this in the future in an attempt to improve TV ratings, it may be an idea worth looking into. I don't like the idea of conference games in the first or second week of the season, and I'm leery of early divisional matchups, but overall this may not be a bad idea if it evens out the distribution of attractive TV games.

Here's another idea that was advanced in the comments:

I realize I have been talking around something I need to expand on. Look, almost all of you have a cable or satellite box, with a DVR function. In five years, that box will be more like a computer than it is even now. It will be very easy for everybody to order any game that has a camera in front of it, from anywhere in the nation, no matter who your provider is.

...

Right now, the most valuable asset is clusters of fans. making broadcasts profitable. However, the technology is moving towards making…I don’t know the right term…splintercasts? more profitable.

It's easy to say that the Big 12's TV contract is not as good as the Big 10's or SEC's. That much is obvious. The real question is this: What should we do about it? Despite its initial problems, the Big 10 Network has been a success for that conference. Does the answer to more TV revenue lie in starting a Big 12 Network, or is the answer something else?

Think for a moment about the history of TV. Initially, it was just a few channels of bland programming, and most thought it was a passing fad that would never catch on. Over time, more channels were added. When I was a kid in Nebraska back in the late 1980s and 1990s, I remember that we had about 35 channels on our cable package. Today, regardless of who your provider is, you have access to thousands of channels, if you're willing to pay for them. Television has always moved toward specialization. Do you love cats? There's probably a TV channel for you. Channels like ESPN, The History Channel, and Discovery would have seemed wildly specialized 30 years ago, but now they're pretty general compared to the Military Channel and the various Fox Sports outlets around the country.

Of course, the Internet adds a whole new dimension to this. As the author suggests, it's only a matter of time before schools will be able to offer netcasts of all their games -- in every sport -- and make money off them. It will be the ultimate specialization. The technology isn't in place for this to be profitable yet, but within a decade it almost undoubtedly will be. So the question becomes whether you start a Big 12 TV channel, or whether you put your resources into figuring out how to make money off the next medium of "televising" games.

While I'm sure you're disappointed to see this post end, I don't have the answer to that. I've become an educated man over the last seven years, but this is not my area of expertise. Your thoughts are welcome in the comments, as I'd like to know more about where things are going, and what we should do with it. Just off the top of my head, the following questions leap to mind:

If netcast technology is what the Big 12 embraces, do we pool all that revenue and split it equally? Does each school keep all its revenue, thus assuring that schools with more alums and bigger fanbases get more money while other schools get less? Do we share half of it equally, then split the rest of it by percentage of contribution? Something else?
What about some of the more rural areas of the Big 12? My grandma used to email me once a week, but the ISP in her town of 2,000 people went out of business, so she doesn't have the Internet at home anymore. The Big 12's footprint is demonstrably rural, and most of these areas don't have local providers that can make money off this type of technology. Does everyone out in the sticks have to get DirecTV if we go to this type of arrangement? What is the delivery method? And no, this isn't limited to any single state, because there are as many out-in-the-boondocks towns in Texas as there are in Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and Iowa combined.

Talking Points: Bryce Brown, Brian Butler, and the NCAA

Hooper — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:00:17 -0000

As much as I'd like to spend the Talking Points waxing poetically about the fall practices, including information about the rising stars on the defensive line, the hunger to win across the whole team,and Erik Ainge's struggles to advance in New York, the big news is obviously the NCAA's intiial ruling that Bryce Brown is currently ineligible. To that end, I've gathered as much information as I could on the case to try to make some more sense of it.

The focus of the investigation was on fundraising activities that Brian Butler engaged in for the sake of a tour of schools in the south for his players. From the Wichita Eagle:

Brown was one of 10 players who went on a summer 2007 tour to college campuses in the southern part of the country. Butler billed it as an academic tour. Players on that tour included Brown and his brother, Arthur, who is at Miami (Fla.); Rose Hill graduate Blaize Foltz, now at Texas Christian; Northwest graduate Chris Harper, who transferred from Oregon to Kansas State; and 2008 Top 11 selection Jaydan Bird, a Conway Springs graduate now at Oklahoma.

...

Butler said money was raised for that tour by hosting barbecues at Wal-Mart and Sam's, a fund-raiser at Texas Roadhouse, as well as money given by four donors whom Butler did not identify.

"I deemed it initially, and marketed it that way, as an academic tour," Butler said. "I know you can't get money donated when it has anything to do with athletics....

That is the heart of the issue. It's worth noting that, at the time of this writing, only Bryce Brown has been targeted by the NCAA for any disciplinary action. This implies that either Bryce received extra-special benefits on this tour (as a sophomore in high school) that nobody else received, or that the NCAA is making a statement.

Brian Butler believes it's a statement by the NCAA. He was on a radio interview Wednesday morning with KGSO of Wichita. Some Volnation members liveblogged it here if you're interested. In it, Butler asserts that the investigation that ended in Brown's ineligibility was birthed in this New York Times article, which painted Butler in a rather dim light. It's an article that made Doc Saturday change his opinion on Butler.

We had a roundup of the Brian Butler articles and discussion last spring that you may want to revisit. The NCAA investigation has been over for a while, and they have just now gotten round to issuing judgment, so the real information of concern is the information we knew back then. Again, if you're interested, I recommend revisiting the articles from the spring to better understand the context.

Potential Players, Butler's organization, has issued a statement regarding the investigation. Here is the link, but from the article, here is a list of the players affected by the fundraiser:

Here is a list of players who have been involved with Brian Butler's training, or camps:

2009 Class and School Attended

Jaydan Bird-University of Oklahoma, Bryce Brown-University of Tennessee, Devin Gfeller-Kansas St. University, Wil Richards-University of Nebraska, Riley Spencer-University of Kansas, Forrest Stucky-Pittsburg St., Huldon Tharp-University of Kansas, Kevin Young-University of Kansas, Aaron Wilson-Butler County, Jeff Page-Butler County , Garrett Kraft-Coffeyville C.C., Justin Puthoff-University of Kansas, Jake Snodgrass-McPherson,

NFL

Kamerion Wimbley-Cleveland Browns (2001)

Players Currently in 4 year Colleges

Tysyn Hartman-Kansas State University (2007), Frank Delarue-Kansas State University (2007), Matt Bowie-University of Kansas (2007) , Arthur Brown Jr.-University of Miami (2008), Chris Harper-University of Oregon (2008), Chase Meija-Northern Illinois University (2008), Blaize Foltz-Texas Christian University (2008), D.J. Breathett-University of Oklahoma (2008)

Scholarships Commits for 2007 -2008 Camp Participants

Blake Bell-University of Oklahoma(2010 Commit), Devin Hedgepeth-Oklahoma St. University(2010 Commit), Nathan Stanley-University of Mississippi, Ethan Powell-Missouri Southern, Brayden Burris-Iowa State University, Brock Bell-Emporia State University, Bart Voegeli-University of Kansas, Austin Yeargain-Southwestern Oklahoma St. University, Romero Cotton-University of Nebraska , Garrick Williams-Wake Forest University, Jake Morse-Missouri State, Trey Stead-Emporia State University.

With a list that extensive, it's very difficult to believe that only Bryce Brown is worthy of NCAA attention, if there is indeed some foul play afoot. More details will come out in time, and perhaps there is information that is not yet public about this incident that will clarify the NCAA's actions, but for right now, the NCAA appears intent on making an example out of Bryce Brown in order to create the precedent they need to shut down handlers like Brian Butler.

Predicting the Season - UCLA Bruins

dvieira — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 20:42:14 -0000

via ucla.freedomblogging.com. Rick Neuheisel may wish he could come in and play some QB for the Bruins this year

UCLA had a rough go of it last year, compiling a 4-8 record under first year head coach Rick Neuheisel. Karl Dorrell left the cupboard bare when he was unceremoniously fired but the Bruins have put together very good back-to-back recruiting classes that should start to contribute more to the games starting this season. In 2008, Oregon had just come off a devastating 44-10 loss at USC in welcoming the UCLA Bruins into Autzen Stadium. Under the lights, the home crowd saw Jeremiah Masoli complete 5 passes out of 19 attempts for a whopping 42 yards. One of those passes was a diving score by Chris Harper in the second quarter. The rushing game ruled the day with the Ducks rumbling for 323 yards on the ground, including a 69-yard touchdown scamper by LeGarrette Blount to seal the win for Oregon.

This year, Oregon travels to Los Angeles to face off against the UCLA Bruins in the Rose Bowl. Oregon will be coming off a 4-game homestand while UCLA will have already had a bye and a trip to a tough Stanford team on the road. The Bruins will be better in 2009 but will they have any advantage against Oregon when the teams meet in October? Let's run the numbers.

Oregon Offense vs. UCLA Defense

The Bruin Defense is definitely the brightest spot for the entire team and you don't have to look farther than 6-2, 295-pound junior defensive tackle Brian Price. He was first team Pac-10 last year and will most likely go out early to the NFL. His 14 tackles for loss and 4.5 sacks were huge for an interior lineman and will cause lots of problems for opposing teams in both the running and passing games.

Kyle Bosworth will be coming back after a sprained knee sidelined him for the 2008 season and should give UCLA depth at the linebacker position. With 4 guys having starter experience, the combination of a tough defensive line and a solid linebacking core give the Bruins the potential to have an extremely stingy front 7.

If there is one concern, it would be speed around the edge and this is where Oregon should be able to take advantage, especially if LaMichael James breaks out in the first couple of games. During the middle of the season last year, there was a 4 game stretch where UCLA gave up 200 yards on the ground on average to the teams they faced. If Oregon can work sideline to sideline and get those linebackers and defensive lineman working horizontally, the speed of the Duck attack should loosen the middle up for big gains.

In the secondary, CB Michael Norris and S Brett Lockett are both gone from a unit that was ranked 8th in the nation against the pass and got better as the season wore on. Alterraun Verner will be back and locking down everyone on his side of the field. On the other side though, redshirt freshman Aaron Hester will see a lot of passes his way as teams look to go away from Verner's side. The secondary, as a whole, is young. The two-deep coming out of spring has one senior, four sophmores and three freshman. This year will be filled with growing pains as those young guys adjust.

When UCLA faced Oregon last year, Jeremiah Masoli had barely gotten his feet wet after taking over for Justin Roper. The passing game hadn't developed but the running game did a great job of helping the team win. This year should be a different story as Masoli comes in as a major passing threat. Against some young corners and linebackers that don't have blazing speed, Oregon should find a lot of success in the wide receiver screens and getting the ball to the outside with one on one chances against the secondary. With Verner on Jemere Holland, that should leave Jeff Maehl and DJ Davis with plenty of opportunities.

Oregon Defense vs. UCLA Offense

The biggest news concerning the UCLA Offense is that Kevin "Interception Machine" Craft is out as quarterback having been replaced by 6-2, 226-pound redshirt freshman Kevin Prince. A highly touted recruit, Prince will get a trial by fire during the upcoming season and unless he is the second coming of Tim Tebow, look for a lot of freshman mistakes as he learns the ropes. You would think that Kevin Craft would be the backup right? Richard Brehaut had a great spring and clearly outplayed Craft but still has a redshirt year that I'm sure the Bruins would love to keep intact.

On the offensive line, UCLA just has problems plain and simple. After the injury bug hit them hard last year, the best thing you can say is that at least they have experience. With 8 different lineman earning at least 2 starts, they will excel at lineman by committee. After a tough year last year, spring didn't look any better as bad snaps, missed blocking assignments, and issues with fundamentals continued to plague the line. Oregon, even with rebuilding their defensive line in the off-season, will have a clear advantage in the trenches. With a leaky offensive line combined with a young and inexperienced quarterback, it might be a long day for whomever is back there for the Bruins.

Running backs in Christian Ramirez, Derrick Coleman, and Johnathan Franklin all come in with a combined 72 carries among them. UCLA will probably employ a "Thunder and Lightening" attack, with 6-2, 220-pound Ramirez as the thunder and Franklin as the lightening. With how athletic the Oregon front 7 appears in the spring, look for the Ducks to neutralize the running attack and force Prince to beat them through the air.

Prince will have some options to throw to as the three top receivers for the Bruins come back for another round. Taylor Embree, Terrence Austin and Ryan Mota all come back and should give Prince opportunities in space. With a young quarterback and the lack of a truly dynamic receiver, the Bruins might have some difficulties stretching the field. With the lack of a deep threat, look for the strong Oregon secondary and linebacking units to aggressively fly to the ball, hoping to disrupt the passing and running attacks.

Special Teams

Kai Forbath is dynamite in the place kicking game, including 6-for-6 from beyond 50 yards. He just might be the biggest offensive weapon the Bruins have next year. If the defense can keep it close, Forbath might be just the guy to pull out a couple of wins for the team. UCLA will be replacing their all Pac-10 first team punter Aaron Perez and Jeff Locke looks to be getting the nod. He was the nation's premiere punter coming out of high school in 2008. Given how the offense looks, Locke should get plenty of opportunities for playing time.

Oregon should have an advantage in kick returns as the coverage teams for the Bruins were miserable nationally last year in both kick (100th) and punt coverage(107th).

Conclusion

I like Oregon's chances in this game. UCLA may have improved from last year but Oregon will be greatly improved from when the Bruins and Ducks last met. In all skill positions, Oregon is better than it was last year for this matchup and with UCLA having some inexperience in the secondary, look for Oregon to exploit the holes in the defense in the running and passing games. UCLA's season offensively will all depend on how Kevin Prince adjusts to being the man with the plan. If he struggles out of the gate, Oregon will have a field day. If Prince can get his legs under him before the Oregon game, the passing attack will allow the Bruins to stay in it, especially if their defense can get some key turnovers.

The kicking and punting game should factor into this game as both teams have some challenges. We could see a 14 point swing from special teams alone. That being said, Oregon should be able to handle the Bruins at the Rose Bowl.

Oregon 30 – UCLA 13

Crossfire Q&A: Kansas State

RPT — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:30:09 -0000

It wouldn't be Kansas State Week without bringing some Wildcats aboard, and it certainly wouldn't be the Unholy Alliance if our SBN brethren from Bring On The Cats didn't stop by for a Q&A. Today, we welcome both TB and Panjandrum from BOTC. On to the questions!

RMN: Normally I'd ask for a recap of the previous season and offseason, but we don't have that kind of time. Let me ask this: What is the expectation of success for Snyder? Is it something as intangible as "progress," or is there a finite number of wins KSU fans need to see?

TB: Progress is plenty for me. I hate to compare K-State to Nebraska in any way, but in a lot of ways, Bill Callahan and Ron Prince are comparable. While I don't think we need to merely "try harder" to succeed, it would be nice to see a defense that lines up properly, knows its assignments, and can at least attempt to make a sound tackle. We'd love to have, as Pan so elequently put it, an offense that isn't based on "screen left, screen right, dump to the tight end, and run into the guard's ass."

Snyder's teams are notoriously slow starters, so the early going could be rough. However, it was usually pretty clear that K-State's players started to "get it" as the season went on, and that's one big thing we'll be looking for this season. If the offense starts clicking toward the end, and the defense starts looking like a competent FBS unit, I'll be OK with that.

Panjandrum: Progress is totally subjective right now, so the number of wins and losses, while probably indicative of progress, isn't what I'm looking for. I simply want to see a team (specifically a defense) that looks like it knows what in the hell it's doing. Sound tackling, sound blocking, and some semblance of roster management are probably good things to look for. I just want to feel like I'm watching a football game and not a visual metaphor for anal rape... I like to set the bar high.

RMN: Handicap the quarterback situation for us. Is it going to be Carson Coffman's team? Is there going to be a lot of stock placed in quarterback play, or are the Cats going to rely on an almost as murky running back corps?

TB: Carson Coffman is the prohibitive favorite heading into fall camp. He has the most experience of all the options -- even if that isn't saying much -- and he has actually played fairly well in mop-up duty. That said, Snyder is a known tinkerer, especially at quarterback, and if it's clear that Coffman doesn't have it, expect to see Grant Gregory or Daniel Thomas see some time. Even if things work out well for Coffman, I would expect to see Thomas in there to mix things up and get him some experience. Snyder is an offensive genius, and I'm sure there are a few thoughts rattling around his head about using Thomas and Brandon Banks in the backfield to give opposing DCs some nightmares. Well, maybe not nightmares, but at least unpleasant thoughts as they sit in their offices and try to figure out what the old man is going to do.

Panjandrum:I agree with TB for the most part. After trying to observe what's been said in interviews, the media guide, and watching the Spring Game a few times online, I really think Coffman will be the starter for the entire year. I haven't always held that belief, but I think he will. Daniel Thomas will probably be used in some special formations, but given that KSU has the majority of its talent at the skill positions (namely TE and WR), I think a consistent 'game manager' is what Snyder needs.

Coffman seems like that kind of player. It will be his job to get the ball to Brandon Banks, Lamark Brown, Daniel Thomas, Jeron Mastrud, etc. If he can simply distribute the ball, the Cats should be in good shape offensively.

More questions after the jump!

RMN: What's expected from a KSU defense that's one year removed from finishing last in the Big 12 in total defense?

TB: In a word, improvement. Vic Koenning directed a Clemson unit that finished 18th last season in total defense. I've watched a few YouTube videos of Clemson's defense last year, and they're fast, they hit, and they force turnovers. Now, I'll bet my dick to a dollar that Koenning had a deeper roster at Clemson than he'll have at K-State this season, but as I mentioned above, a group of coaches who can teach the players to hit and wrap up and understand how to construct a game plan for Big 12 offenses would be a vast improvement. Further, we do have some fairly talented players on the defensive side of the ball, with Brandon Harold, Joshua Moore, and Jeffrey Fitzgerald.

Finally, on the defensive side, I'm reminded of something Dr. Saturday wrote about Nebraska before last season that I think is applicable to K-State this season (sorry, can't find the link). Nebraska's defense in 2007, much like K-State's defense in 2008, was historically bad. Not just kind of not so good. Full-blown suckitude. With better coaching this season, there almost has to be a regression toward the mean, if not a regression all the way to the mean. Even if we "only" improve to, say, 90th in total defense, that's still an improvement of almost 30 spots in the rankings. That means at least one and maybe two more stops per game, and while that's not going to be enough to win 10 games, nobody expects to win 10 games. If we win one or two more this season than we did last season, the year will be a resounding success.

Panjandrum:Honestly, I'd be shocked if we didn't see major improvement. Comparing Vic Koenning to Tim Tibesar is like comparing Einstein to Forrest Gump. Now, that said, it's not like KSU is going to jump into the top twenty-five or anything like that, but if KSU can find a way to sneak into the 50-75 range, that would be ideal.

That may seem like pie in the sky, but KSU will have a strong defensive line (Freshman AA, Brandon Harold, NFL prospect, Jeffrey Fitzgerald, Former 4* recruit, Daniel Calvin), an average linebacker corps, and one of the best corners in the conference in Josh Moore. There isn't a lot of depth there, but the front line talent actually has some NFL ability at certain positions. So if KSU can stay healthy, there's a chance that the defense can see some major improvement if told how to, you know, how to play defense.

RMN: One of the main talking points about Snyder's return is that he's coming back to a division that has seen the balance of power shift in his absence, especially on the recruiting trail. Do you think Snyder is equipped to deal with the emergence of Mangino and Pinkel's recruiting in their respective states?

TB: In a word, yes. You guys have an excellent point about the shift in the balance of power, and that definitely affects K-State, but it also overlooks certain other factors. It's true that, back when K-State was very good, KU and Mizzou were not very good. That definitely helped in signing the few top prospects that Kansas and the KC metro area produce every year. However, Nebraska and Colorado were also much, much better then than they are now, so while the balance of power has shifted, the North is clearly not as good overall as it was back in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

I will say that I am much, much more worried about beating out KU for in-state recruits than I am about beating Mizzou for KC-area recruits. In order to be successful, we need to have a chokehold on the propects produced by Kansas high schools and, just as importantly the Kansas junior colleges. Mangino has made significant inroads in those areas, but with Snyder back we're starting to see a reversal of that trend. Already, players like Chris Harper and Broderick Smith (probably) are transferring back to K-State to play for Snyder. We've landed a strong oral commitment from four-star running back DeMarcus Robinson from Wichita. I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to get some of those players Pinkel is getting from KC, but if we lock down Kansas, both high school and junior college, and pick up some players from Texas and Florida like we have in the past, we can be a successful program. Snyder never made his living on top-20 recruiting classes, he made his living from finding players that fit his system and were willing to work hard.

Panjandrum: I don't necessarily share my colleague's concerns about Mangino's recruiting in Kansas. As it stands now, KSU is actually doing better in Kansas than KU is if you believe Rivals.com. KU isn't really getting serious consideration from the top-line talent in the state (Justin McCay, Blake Bell, DeMarcus Robinson), but KSU has a commitment from Robinson, former 4* athlete, Chris Harper, has chosen to transfer back to KSU, and former 3* wide receiver, Brodrick Smith, transferred back to KSU. Neither of them seriously considered KU.

You can argue that Mangino's improvement in Kansas recruiting has been mostly due to the vacuum that was left when Prince took over, and now that Snyder is back, there is evidence that KSU will probably do better in-state because of the "juice" Snyder commands in this state. Regardless of age, and regardless of record since 2004, you can probably ask high school coaches in the state of Kansas who they would rather send their kids to play for, and I'm pretty sure the number would skew towards Snyder, and it would probably be by a large margin.

If any programs are going to cause problems for K-State in recruiting, it's going to be Mizzou and Oklahoma State. Andy Hill has KC on lockdown, and OSU has always had a presence in Wichita. Both of these cities are going to be major battlegrounds for KSU, and it's essential that if KSU wants to get back to contending for the division, they're going to have to win those battles.

RMN: Outside of Illinois, there probably isn't a program as glad to see Jeremy Maclin go as Kansas State. How do you feel Kansas State matches up with Missouri's 2009 squad?

TB: Much better than in year's past, but that's a statement of the incredibly obvious. Our strengths this season should be in the trenches on both sides, as we have some talented players along the defensive line and a ton of experience along the offensive line. Blaine Gabbert will be a very experienced sophomore by the time he plays K-State in November, but if our defensive line pans out as we hope, we should be able to make things tougher on him. Also, Mizzou's defense wasn't particularly stout last season, and if we see the improvement that we usually see out of Snyder's teams, there's a good chance our offense could be hitting its stride by November.

Panjandrum: Honestly, if you look at certain indicators, KSU matches up well on paper. KSU has a number of returning starters, MU lost a lot. Bill Snyder has never lost to Gary Pinkel. KSU has that game at home...on Senior Day. We have a Coffman and you don't (HA!).

Truthfully, any time that you have a program in transition, you're at a disadvantage. Pinkel has established a solid program and systems that probably function more on replacing parts as opposed to replacing talent. So, given that, I'll give MU the advantage in that game, but I wouldn't be surprised if KSU is much more competitive due to the emotional nature of that game, and given that this is the last 'winnable' game on the schedule, a shot at bowl eligibility may be on the line. All of this could make for a fun game in Manhattan.

RMN: Finish the following statements:

TB:

K-State Will Win If... the team avoids injuries during the season, still has something to play for by November, we see the improvement we are hoping to see during the season, and Missouri is something of a disappointment this season. There are so many factors that go into this matchup it almost makes my head spin. I like the fact that the game is at home, and I like the fact that The Legend has never lost to Gary Pinkel, but neither of those factors is dispositive on who will win. We need a lot of things to go right for us this season to be successful, but I think you can say the same thing about Missouri, too, to some extent.
Missouri Will Win If... Gabbert is the quarterback he's expected to be by November and they find serviceable fill-ins for Maclin and Chase Coffman. It wouldn't hurt to find a little defense somewhere, although that's hardly a strong requirement in the North these days. A lot of fans of all programs are writing off Missouri because they lost so many incredible playmakers last season, but that overlooks just how far ahead of the rest of the North they have been, at least in terms of talent. Bill has thoroughly documented all of that by detailing just how much Mizzou has beat each North opponent by over the last two seasons (the best approximation I can give is that it's eleventy billion to 20). So while they have fallen farther than the other North teams in terms of firepower lost, they also fell from a higher perch. We'll see how that plays out this year.

Panjandrum:

K-State Will Win If... The entire team stays healthy and the front-line starters have grown into the system over the previous ten games. Also, they must take advantage of the Senior Day atmosphere.
Missouri Will Win If... KSU didn't improve considerably over the 2008 season and Gabbert decides to throw the football to guys in purple.

RMN: Give us a non-binding, WAY too early score prediction:

TB: I have to play the odds and pick Mizzou to win at this point, even in Manhattan. I'll channel my inner Lee Corso and say "closer than the experts think," though. Let's say Missouri 31, K-State 24.

Panjandrum: I like TB's Prediction. I may go with 31-28 Missouri because I think it has the potential to be a close, entertaining game. However, this program needs to learn how to win again, and MU is ahead of the curve on that.

Morning Quack Fix: Bellotti on transition, ticket sales, and (hopefully) a final word on Harper's transfer

ntrebon — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:32:04 -0000

There's a little more quack out there than usual on a Tuesday morning. Enjoy!

Moseley responds to a lot of the criticism that has been heaped on Chris Harper and his decision to transfer. For anyone still holding a grudge, it's worth checking out. Personally, I wish Chris the best at Kansas State. Except on 9/3/11 and 9/1/12.
Moseley has an article published for Athlon on Jeremiah Masoli, which details his rise from be being buried Oregon's depth chart at the start of last season to a dark-horse Heisman candidate at the start of this season.
Jeff Smith from the Oregonian has a *long* Q and A with Bellotti about his transition to AD. Lots of interesting answers, including Bellotti's thoughts on where he might be during the first home football game and how he might react when he no longer has an influence on the game.
Rachel Bachman, also from the Oregonian, notes that, despite the current economic climate, Oregon is nearing a record total in season ticket sales for this season. Single-game tickets will go on sale this Friday at midnight.
OBNUG has posted their preview of Oregon. It's a pretty a good read, so check it out. I see that several ATQers have already commented on it.
Unsurprisingly, Nick Daschel declares USC as Wide Receiver U, thanks in large part to the performance of Trojan wideouts in the NFL draft. Oregon barely squeaks in at ninth place -- one point ahead of Stanford. In a related post, Daschel notes the various players for each team that contributed to the final rankings.
Finally, Ted Miller continues his "Hope and Concern" series with Oregon, focusing Masoli for the former and replacing six linemen for the latter.

That's it for this morning. As always, leave your comments or other interesting links below.

Go Ducks!

Morning Quack Fix: DT position battle, Chris Harper speaks out

jtlight — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 14:47:26 -0000

It was a very quiet weekend in the Duck world. Here is your post-weekend quack.

If you missed it, or just don't like scrolling down, BisonDuck wrote a great piece on the DT position battle Blake Ferras and Simi Toeaina. If you haven't already, make sure to check that out.
As noted by JConant in a fanpost, Chris Harper opened up with Rob Moseley last week, and cited his reason for leaving Oregon entirely on being homesick. He went so far as to say that he liked the coaching staff, and was becoming more comfortable in the receivers role. While I'm willing to take the kid at face value, some aren't. Take Bob Rickert, taking his crotchety old man schtick to new heights, by mocking the decisions of an 18 year old kid to whom he has little to no connection. Way to keep our fan base looking classy Bob. The comments (heck, it's Oregonlive) are even worse. Good luck to Chris, I hope he finds exactly what he's looking for.
According to Pro Football Weekly, Max Unger will be starting this year in Seattle, though his exact position is not yet known.
Nick Daschel at BusterSports ranked all 30 Pac-10 non conference games. Coming in No. 1 is Oregon/Boise State, just beating out USC/Ohio State. One things for sure, there will be a lot of great football this fall.
The boys over at OBNUG take a look at Boise State's linebacking corp, which could be a weakness, but hasn't received a lot of attention yet.
Lastly, I really like how this ends.

As always, comment away. GO DUCKS!

Are The Ducks Going Through A Recruiting Crisis?

JConant — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:16:53 -0000

I was bummed when Tahj Boyd selected Clemson. He could have been a great fit as a QB in Oregon's spread offense. I was disappointed when Bryce Brown picked Tennessee, and a little put off by his stating that Oregon couldn't prep him for the NFL like UT. I wasn't expecting Aaron Plugrad to leave the program, but it made sense. I wasn't at all surprised when Chris Harper left, but still, it hurt a little. I was surprised when Justin Roper bailed.

Then, this past weekend...

I didn't see Oklahoma coming in the recruitment of running back Brennan Clay. Especially after Clay just weeks ago was proclaiming Oregon to be "...kind of my dream school." I'll admit I was a bit shocked when I then read that running back Ethan Grant publicly stated he was re-opening his recruitment after having committed to the Ducks earlier in the year.

It all has me pondering one question: Do the Oregon Ducks have a recruiting crisis?

Yes, I believe they do. Sort of.

I'll explain after the jump.

Why worry?

I get the sense the Ducks are falling behind in the race and I don't think we know yet whether Chip Kelly and his new-look staff have the late kick of an Oregon distance runner.

Yes, I realize that no player is a lock until he shows up in the locker room, puts on his high-tech cooling pads and rapid-dry jersey and takes the field. Yes, I may be overreacting. Our Ducks need solid running back recruits this year. One just walked away from his dream school and the other is suddenly up in the air. The competition for top talent out west is heating up and the Ducks appear to be having a tough time sealing the deal.

If you put Ethan Grant's commitment on ice for the time being, the Ducks have two verbals here in early June - local 4-star talent Curtis White and 3-star cornerback Terrance Mitchell from Sacramento.

Compare that to a couple otherwise mediocre-to-bad Pac-10 performers from 2008. Stanford has 16 verbals, and they're not just a bunch of smart 2-star guys. Coach Harbaugh has landed a couple 4-stars and a slew of 3-star players from all across the country. Washington is having a great recruiting season. The Dawgs now have nine verbals including yesterday's announcement by 4-star QB Nick Montana. Unlike Stanford, the best talent UW is landing is mostly local. Steve Sarkisian clearly is protecting the Seattle area from getting pilfered by Oregon and Oregon State. The University of Mother Earth at Berkeley (a.k.a. Cal) also is taking care of business with six verbals, including 4-star players from both Colorado and Texas.

Brand erosion for Oregon football?

So what exactly is Oregon's problem? I'm looking squarely at circumstances that have enabled a lot of potential anti-Duck propaganda. Circumstances from 2007 and 2008 are now question marks in 2009.

A few stars have fallen to injury the past couple years - Dennis Dixon, Jeremiah Johnson in ‘07, Roper early last year, Jeremiah Masoli against Boise State. The team, despite all the talent in 2007 and 2008, was unable to avoid three or four losses. LaGarrette Blount put up poor stats against quality linebacker units at USC and Cal. The top position coach in the nation tried to leave Oregon after the '08 season, but came in second place for a head coaching position and ended up hanging around. A couple other coaches were dismissed and replaced with new faces. The venerable Mike Bellotti announced he would leave sometime after the 2008 season, then stepped away and handed the whistle to a guy who has yet to prove himself as a head coach. Three reasonably high-profile players exit the program within a couple weeks following spring ball.

Those are circumstances, and not pretty ones.

We of green and yellow blood have faith. You and I believe in Chip Kelly and his new coaching additions. We understand that the Ducks lost second string guys and have depth and talent at those positions. We understand that one lost recruit just opens the door for another talented player.

The circumstances, however, raise questions. Those questions are easily manipulated into doubt. And I have no doubt those questions are being raised repeatedly by powerful coaches who covet many of the same talented players Oregon is recruiting. The Lane Kiffins and Bob Stoops of the world must be hammering away at Oregon's credibility as they pitch their programs as better options to talented young men who are likely swimming in the attention and overwhelmed by the enormity of it all.

That, my ATQ friends, is the "sort of" to the answer to my own question.

This crisis, in my opinion, isn't a matter of Oregon lacking a good product to sell. It is the result of Oregon's top competition having easy targets when it comes to Oregon's identity. In marketing we might refer to Oregon's crisis as an issue of brand erosion.

Oh, the stories they must tell.

"Their QBs all get hurt." "They've only played in one BCS game since 2001." "They'll never win a conference championship because USC has overwhelming talent." " Their spread offense doesn't translate into developing an NFL-worthy profile." "Their coaching staff is unproven." "Some of their best players are leaving so the new coaches must be difficult to play for."

Imagine that you're an 18-year-old with potential million dollar talent. You're hearing all that rhetoric from guys named Stoops, Kiffin, Sarkisian, Neuheisel, Tedford, Miles, Brown, Meyer, Saban, Tressel, Leach, Gundy, Erickson, Riley and many of their esteemed assistants. Are you not buying into those messages and basing your verbal commitment on the appearance of a more stable and nurturing program?

I believe that's exactly what's going on. The vulnerability door is open and Oregon's big-time competition is running through it full speed.

Am I crazy? Maybe.

Just to check, I bounced some thoughts off Chris Fetters, who covers college football recruiting in the Pacific NW for Scout.com. Chris gave me the encouraging notion that we're just seeing a natural process play out.

"To be honest, whenever there is regime change, there's going to be change in how things are done, who the new staff likes, and how that affects not only the current players on staff, but also the ones that were being recruited by the previous staff, but are now possibly looking at a different set of issues. That's what you're seeing right now." He added, "Is it pretty? No. But I think [Chip] Kelly has been very smart about reporting on the players that are leaving now, simply because by the time fall camp starts, that will no longer be the story."

Since Chris covers the Northwest closely, I asked him what he was hearing about Chip Kelly the new head coach, relative to recruiting. Chris had this response: "To be honest, coming from my neck of the woods - which is the NW - Kelly's recruiting hasn't been all that different from Mike Bellotti's. They target their in-state guys and whatnot, but Oregon's recent success has had as much to do with how they've recruited from afar as it has from recruiting in-state. So it doesn't surprise me at all that Kelly is recruiting nationally, and recruiting for very specific needs. His offense is highly powerful and sophisticated, and it needs the right body types to run at a high idle."

We probably agree, Chris has a pragmatic view of what's going on. I get it. The Ducks are swinging for some top shelf players that might help Chip score 56 points a game, and they're going to whiff on a few curveballs. Still, natural process or not, I can't help thinking that Oregon this year might struggle to win battles over high-profile recruits. It's my theory and I'm sticking to it. Slippage in recruiting, while conference rivals are beginning to excel, troubles me.

Is there a fix? Absolutely!

Of course, there is a way to stop the slippage (that's a great word, slippage, which I confess, I am stealing from author Stephen King).

If Oregon can't land many of their top targets this year, the coaches need to be ultra-savvy and find some gems among the cast-offs of other top-20 programs. They need to continue mining the JC ranks for guys who fit the Oregon scheme and can play or add depth immediately.

Then the Ducks simply need to win. They need to beat Boise State on the road, and Utah and Cal at home this coming season. Beating USC in Eugene again in 2009 would be huge. The Ducks need to make a Michigan-sized statement at Tennessee next year, and then generate a surge of momentum as the program transitions from the Masolian period to the Thomasonian period.

Win. Send players to the NFL in fair numbers. Earn a BCS bowl bid in the next two years. Beat a quality SEC team on the road. Give USC hell. Do all of that and simply prove all of the anti-Oregon arguments to be empty, hollow. Change the circumstances. It's a tall, tall order.

I feel uneasy looking at the recruiting notes and seeing Oregon with two verbals and Stanford with 16. I know it's early, but on my compass, that needle is pointing south. Time will tell how Chip Kelly's first recruiting season as head coach turns out for the short term.

If a recruiting turnaround happens this Fall and Oregon can continue to win nine, 10 or more games a year, the long term prospects will take care of themselves. Win and great recruits will come to Eugene, just like they do in Norman and Lincoln and Columbus and Tuscaloosa.

Then maybe, just maybe, I can stop sweating college football in the middle of June.

Who Knew? Oregon's Rich QB History has a Downside

PaulSF — Fri, 29 May 2009 20:46:18 -0000

via www.collegefootballfansite.com

View full size photo »

June Jones did it in 1973. Johnny DuRocher did it in 2004.

And just this week, Justin Roper and Chris Harper did it, becoming the latest Ducks to fly the coop. It would seem Oregon quarterbacks have become notorious for seeking greener grass by way of transfer.

The news was no doubt unsettling, but surprising? Not in the slightest. Inexplicable? Quite the contrary. But that didn't seem to be the reaction among some of us (and by us, I mean them). Apparently they forgot about Jeremiah Masoli, whose emergence as the Ducks' clear-cut No. 1 QB is the painfully obvious catalyst in Roper and Harper's decisions to jump ship.

But Masoli's rise is merely the effect, not the cause. The real culprit that drove Roper and Harper away? Oregon's elite quarterback tradition.

On Tuesday, Bleacher Report scribe Fletcher Johnson posted a nice feature on Masoli's rise to stardom at Oregon, detailing how the young signal caller has found his place among Oregon's elite quarterback fraternity. In the midst of this week's panic over the defecting Ducks, Johnson's piece was a pleasant reminder of Oregon's prolific history of producing top-notch QBs, and Masoli is simply the latest to emerge.

But in a tight quarterback competition that saw four different QBs take snaps last year, there was bound to be more losers than winners.

Roper and Harper lost.

And it's not the first time it's happened at Oregon.

PaulSF's Top 10 Oregon QBs of All-Time
Rank	Player	Grad Yr
1	Dan Fouts	1972
2	Norm Van Brocklin	1948
3	Bob Berry	1964
4	Joey Harrington	2001
5	Dennis Dixon	2007
6	Chris Miller	1986
7	Tony Graziani	1996
8	Danny O'Neil	1994
9	Akili Smith	1998
10	Kellen Clemens	2005
Others notable Oregon signal callers: Shy Huntington, Norv Turner, George Shaw, Bill Musgrave, A.J. Feeley

In 1973, after sitting the previous season behind future Hall of Famer Dan Fouts and eventual long-time NFL coach Norv Turner on Oregon's quarterback depth chart, June Jones opted to transfer to Hawaii. A year later, he transferred to Portland State and finished his playing career under the tutelage of Mouse Davis, one of the original masterminds of the Run & Shoot. Jones went on to throw for a D-II-record 3,518 yards for the Vikings, which helped jump-start a successful coaching career as a Run & Shoot expert.

Fast-forward to 2003, when three quarterback recruits, Dixon, Brady Leaf and Johnny DuRocher, all signed letters of intent to play for the Ducks. All were touted as top-notch prospects, and, given the Oregon's rich history of quarterbacks and the recent success of Oregon's offenses, the three-headed-quarterback commitment wasn't surprising.

But neither was DuRocher's decision to transfer to Washington after redshirting his freshman year. With Dixon and Leaf both listed ahead of him on the depth chart, he sought a change of scenery.

Like Roper and Harper, Jones and DuRocher were the collateral damage in the natural process of finding the best guy to join Oregon's long list of successful signal callers.

And the list is long. And impressive.

Few schools have produced as many quality quarterbacks as the Ducks. From Norm Van Brocklin to Bob Berry to Dan Fouts to Chris Miller to Akili Smith to Dennis Dixon, there aren't a lot of programs in the country, let alone the conference, with as many talented or successful QBs, either collegiately or professionally.

In the program's 115-year history, the Ducks have compiled an impressive list of accomplished quarterbacks, including four first-team All-Americans: (Shy Huntington, 1916; Van Brocklin, 1948; George Shaw, 1954; Bob Berry, 1964), eight first-team All-Conference QBs (Fouts, 1972; Chris Miller, 1985-86; Bill Musgrave, 1990; Danny O'Neil, 1994; Akili Smith, 1998; Harrington, 2001; Dixon, 2007), three Pac-10 Offensive Players of the Year (Smith, Harrington, and Dixon), two NFL Hall of Famers (Van Brocklin, Fouts), and several others with a wide array of achievements (Fouts in broadcasting, Norv Turner in coaching, etc.).

And with so much history, combined with the Ducks' high-octane spread offense, it's no wonder top-notch quarterback talent has been flocking to Eugene for a shot at adding their name to an already-impressive list.

Unfortunately, there's room for only one starting quarterback. (Well, at least for now, but there's no predictiong Oregon's notoriously innovative offense.) The process of elimination is the nature of the beast.

Roper and Harper were eliminated.

And the list of eliminated prospects goes beyond those that actually end up at Oregon. Alex Brink, Oregon's high school 4A Player of the Year in 2002 who led Eugene's Sheldon High School to a state championship, had grown up a life-long Duck fan. But, in 2003, after being lightly recruited by the Ducks, he opted for Washington State when Oregon's scholarship offers went elsewhere.

Brink was eliminated from the process without ever putting on one of Oregon's well-publicized uniforms.

With so many quarterbacks itching to join the list of elite QuarterDucks, it should come as no surprise that the Ducks ended up with five legitimate quarterbacks on the depth chart last summer. The last one to join was a transfer from Daly City who, after leading his junior college to a national championship in the previous season, decided to join the already-crowded corps of QBs in Eugene. When he arrived, he was at the bottom of the list. If it weren't for two injuries (Costa and Roper) and a relatively subpar performance (Harper), Masoli might be the one heading out of town.

But that didn't end up being the case. Masoli has proved he belongs among Oregon's elite.

Roper and Harper, on the other hand, will have to try their luck elsewhere. And Duck fans can find solace in the fact that the elite Oregon Quarterback Club has found its newest member.