I know I should be looking ahead to this weekend’s No. 1 Texas vs. No. 5 Georgia showdown, but I’m still buzzing from No. 3 Oregon vs. No. 2 Ohio State last week. And many of you are as well.
(Note: Submitted questions have been lightly edited for length and clarity.)
Ryan Day has clearly struggled against top-five teams (2-7 record). I don’t agree with “fans” calling for his firing. What is the correlation between Day and the beginning of Kirby Smart’s career at Georgia? Shouldn’t that situation serve as a reason to stick with Day? (I do think Jim Knowles should call more blitzes though!) —Bryan W.
I’m not here to defend the folks who want to fire a 61-9 coach, but I see two notable differences. One, Smart took over a program that had not won a national championship in nearly 40 years and finished unranked in two of his predecessor’s last three seasons. Day took over a ready-made national championship contender and came awfully close in his first two years (undefeated regular season and close semifinal loss to Clemson in 2019, national championship loss to Alabama in 2020). So Smart had more runway at the start of his tenure.
But most importantly: The coach of Georgia is not singularly defined by one rivalry game the way the coach of Ohio State is by the Michigan game. Mark Richt lost eight of his first 10 Cocktail Parties to Florida and was never in any job uncertainty. Day is 1-3 against Michigan and it feels like 0-15.
Here’s what I’d say about Day. The scoreboard says what the scoreboard says, but I’d be much more concerned if Ohio State was uncompetitive in these big games. That’s just not been the case recently. The 2022 semifinal game against Georgia came down to a missed 50-yard field goal. The Buckeyes had the ball with the chance to drive for the win in last year’s Michigan game. And last weekend they lost by 1 point on the road to Oregon in a game they may well have won if Will Howard slides sooner.
In other words, let’s all take a breath. But if Day loses to a Michigan team with the 18th-ranked passing offense in the 18-team Big Ten, we’ll need to have a more serious talk.
GO DEEPER
Reacting to CFB’s Week 7: Can Ryan Day win big? Plus, an extra fun Heisman race
Stew, many people seem to be both shocked and appalled that Dan Lanning may have intentionally put 12 men on the field to burn a few seconds off the clock — as per the rules. But how upset should Buckeye fans be with Day for seemingly not understanding the rule and letting time slip away? — Don D., Eugene, Ore.
Personally, I’m not shocked or appalled by Lanning’s strategy. If anything, I’m blown away by the ingenuity. The NCAA Football Rules Committee should absolutely change the rule to avoid teams manipulating it like that, as they’re expected to do this week. But it hadn’t as of Saturday night. If I was 10 seconds away from a career- and program-defining win, I would do the exact same thing. (If I’d actually thought of it beforehand.)
The blame with Day and Ohio State falls on how they managed the sequence leading up to it. After Jeremiah Smith’s offensive pass interference, the Buckeyes had 22 seconds and a timeout to regain 15 yards, yet they only got off two more plays. It took 6 seconds to snap the ball when the clock restarted after the flag. Either Day and his staff didn’t understand the timing rule, or they did and still neglected to use their timeout. Either way, I’d imagine Lanning doesn’t take that penalty if there’s enough time for Ohio State to get off two more plays from there.
I’ve seen some people refer to Lanning’s strategy as “cheating.” I disagree. When I think of cheating, I think of someone breaking a rule or committing a crime and thinking they’ll get away with it. In Lanning’s case, he broke a rule with the specific intent of getting caught.
GO DEEPER
Oregon’s epic win a testament to Dan Lanning’s elite talent-stacking
Two national title games in 2010 and 2014 on the back of a revolutionary offense. One of the top winning percentages this century. No active NFL player was alive during the 1983 Toilet Bowl, and no recruit has ever known Oregon as anything other than a (near) superpower. The only thing missing is the actual ring.
So, is Oregon a blue blood? If not, what is left? — Joe in Albany, Ore.
The ring is the thing, Joe.
I’m ambivalent about the term “blue blood,” which we associate with something derived from the past. (Technically, it means someone was born into a royal family.) I’m not sure one can will itself into being a blue blood. As longtime readers know, I prefer the terms “Kings” and “Barons.”
No doubt Oregon is one of the most recognized brands in the sport at this point, but folks back in the South in particular may still need convincing the Ducks deserve a seat at the big boy table. I can promise you this, though. If Oregon wins a national title, it, like Clemson in 2017 and Georgia in 2022, will ascend to King status in my 2027 edition of that column.
What’s your theory as to why the expanded Playoff hasn’t diminished the excitement of the regular season as many feared? My theory is that the expansion has not only brought more teams into the “mix” but has also given the top teams what amounts to two to three “strikes,” which builds anticipation in a different way by keeping the true contenders alive longer. — Joel, Ponca City, Okla.
The low-hanging fruit answer is that football is exciting regardless of the stakes — especially dramatic, last-second football games between highly ranked teams. And of course, we love a good upset, of which there have been several big ones so far.
GO DEEPER
College Football Playoff 2024 projections: Texas, Oregon at top; Indiana moves into bracket
But also, it may have less to do with Playoff expansion and more to do with realignment. It just so happens that the No. 1 (Texas) and No. 2 (Oregon) teams in the country, at the moment, are two of the schools that moved to mega-conferences. This weekend we’re getting our third top-five matchup of the season, and two of them, Ohio State-Oregon and Georgia-Texas, would not have occurred in conference play before this year.
Yes, the thing many people hate most about the sport is having a particularly big impact this season, much to the delight of TV executives.
I think we’ll get a better sense of the CFP effect over the back half of the season. As of the moment, one-loss teams like Ohio State, Georgia, Alabama, etc., are in no different position than they were this time a year ago. The change is going to be a lot more jarring if, say, Georgia and Alabama both suffer their second loss this week and still are not eliminated. Does it make their remaining games more exciting because it’s (possibly) do-or-die from here on out? Or does it start to feel like we’ve lost the plot when we become more focused on 5-2 teams than 7-0 teams?
All I know is last Saturday saw three top-10 teams go to overtime, two top-three teams play last-second heartstoppers and Kansas State beat Deion Sanders’ Colorado on a last-minute 50-yard touchdown. It would have been incredibly exciting whether the CFP field was two, four, eight, 12, 42, 82 or 134.
Does Penn State’s Tyler Warren have to record a sack before he’ll get Heisman attention? Seems like he’s done everything else. — Britt
We’ve already got a Group of 5 running back and a receiver/DB in the mix, so sure, let’s add a tight end too. In fact, let’s make the 2024 Heisman race a no-quarterback zone.
GO DEEPER
Heisman straw poll: Ashton Jeanty sprints into the lead, Dillon Gabriel makes an appearance
In an alternative universe, the Pac-12 still lives. What has happened so far this season? Please tell me the #Calgorithm exists in that world too. — Aaron H.
Awesome question. The best way I could think to approach this was to keep the teams’ nonconference schedules the same, then use the conference schedules they played to this point last season. It’s a little funky because of one fewer idle week last year, so some in this scenario played seven games and some only five. For Oregon State and Washington State, I used their first three games this season as their nonconference games, even though they include a pair of former Pac-12 opponents.
This is what my standings would look like:
- Oregon (3-0, 6-0)
- Washington State (3-0, 6-0)
- Arizona State (2-1, 5-1)
- Utah (2-1, 5-1)
- Cal (2-2, 5-2)
- USC (2-2, 4-2)
- Colorado (2-2, 4-3)
- Arizona (2-2, 4-3)
- Washington (1-2, 3-3)
- Stanford (1-2, 2-4)
- Oregon State (1-3, 3-4)
- UCLA (0-3, 1-4)
Look at you, Wazzu! The Week 5 Boise State loss comes off the Cougs’ schedule, and I think they’d handle Oregon State, UCLA and Arizona (in Pullman). Utah, even with the Cam Rising soap opera, is in slightly better shape, but with a much tougher stretch ahead (at USC, Oregon). The exercise is a bit unfair to Oregon State, which would have a better roster if the Pac-12 still existed, but, the Beavers did just lost lose to Nevada.
As for Cal, a team that’s lost its three ACC games by a combined eight points, wins over Arizona State at home and Oregon State on the road to get the Bears to 5-2 and a likely Top 25 ranking. The #Calgorithm would be going nuts!
Or, with three of those conference wins airing on Pac-12 Network, they never awoke in the first place.
How should I feel as a Gamecock fan? Dejected? Angry? Hopeful? Hopeless? Perplexed? Indifferent? Morose? Cursed? All seem plausible. — Joel M.
If you’re talking long-term, absolutely, the Chicken Curse is real. Far too many examples to cite here. If you’re talking about the present state of South Carolina football, though, I’d feel hopeful.
The Gamecocks are the rare 3-3 team I’d absolutely not want to play. That defensive line is a holy terror. Much like in that Week 2 drubbing of Kentucky, it felt like Kyle Kennard never left the Alabama backfield last week. South Carolina ranks 10th nationally in sacks (19), is tied for 12th in forced turnovers (12), 15th in tackles for loss (44) and 16th in yards per play allowed (4.64). The program hasn’t produced a defense like that since the Jadeveon Clowney/Stephon Gilmore era when Steve Spurrier was winning 11 games a year and Clowney was decapitating ball carriers in a bowl game.
But, they’re 3-3. Which includes one bad loss, 27-3 at home to Ole Miss, but also two near-upsets against LSU (36-33) and Alabama (27-25). Quarterback LaNorris Sellers has his moments, but he’s thrown four touchdowns across six games (two were last week against the Tide) while getting sacked 20 times. If Shane Beamer could have paired Spencer Rattler with this defense, he might have had a Playoff contender.
Beamer needs to win this week’s game at Oklahoma because frankly, the Sooners aren’t good. They’re 2.5-point favorites only because they’re at home. If the Gamecocks clear that hurdle, they’ve got an off week, then a formidable but beatable Texas A&M team coming to town. Win those, and this turns into a pretty darn good season.
Lose both, and I’ll downgrade my advice for Joel from hopeful to dejected, angry, hopeless, perplexed … pretty much all of the above.
How does college football address these “fake” injury timeouts? I was watching the Ole Miss game and one of the “injuries” was highly suspect. I some crazy stat that Ole Miss had 29 injuries immediately after first downs? I would assume this is at the conference level? — Zach in Ypsilanti, Mich.
Ole Miss has become the poster child for fake injuries. The stat ESPN showed during the LSU game was 29 injury stoppages in the Rebels’ past three games against Power 4 opponents (Wake Forest, Kentucky and South Carolina), including 11 the previous week against the Gamecocks. Several of the most egregious ones have been caught on tape. Ole Miss felt compelled to issue a statement that went out almost exactly on Friday at 5 p.m., saying they’ve “provided relevant medical information” to the national officiating coordinator (Steve Shaw) and updated the SEC office. There were still more stoppages against LSU.
This has been going on for years, and it was not that long ago Lane Kiffin was complaining when other teams did it. But it’s a sensitive topic, as officials don’t want to be insensitive to an actual injury. The NCAA Football Rules Committee has spent much time over the past few years discussing it but has issued only a couple of hollow measures. The only real recourse is that a school can report an opponent suspected of faking injuries to Shaw after the fact.
But here’s where college football’s weird, delegated officiating system bites them. According to a 2022 memo, “any penalties levied would be up to the conference office or school involved.” In other words, the rules committee sets the playing rules and points of emphasis, but it’s up to someone else to enforce them.
The seemingly common-sense measure would be this: If a clock stoppage occurs due to an injured player, legit or not, that player sits out the rest of the series. At that point, the risk would seemingly outweigh the reward. But now you’ve got a health and safety issue, where a guy who’s legitimately hurt may avoid getting treatment, or a coach instructs a guy who’s limping around not to go down.
Ultimately, it’s going to be a matter of whether the issue gets treated with more urgency than it has to date. And maybe it will now that Ole Miss has taken the tactic to such an extreme. Unless you either change the rules or start issuing fines and suspensions, Kiffin and his peers have no incentive to stop.
As an absolute BYU homer, am I justified in my anger over AP voters seemingly ignoring their resume, or is my bias pulling wool over my eyes? Yes, we were projected to be a Big 12 doormat, but at what point is the preseason projection thrown out and the actual resume considered instead? — Zach T.
You’re justified. No. 13 BYU (6-0) arguably has a better resume (road win at SMU, home blowouts of Kansas State and Arizona) than several teams above it, most notably No. 12 Notre Dame (5-1 with wins at Texas A&M and vs. Louisville but a home loss to Northern Illinois).
But know you’re not alone in the preseason perception dilemma. Most notable to me: 5-2 Ole Miss, whose best win is at unranked South Carolina, is ranked 18th, but 4-2 Vanderbilt, with a win over No. 7 Alabama, remains unranked. Justice for Diego Pavia.
Arizona State running back Cam Skattebo is one of my favorite players to watch, even though I have zero connection to ASU at all. I will tune in on a Friday night when I should be going to bed just to see him play. What are some of your other favorite players around college football who don’t get enough shine and aren’t household names? — Aaron H.
Skattebo, second only to Ashton Jeanty in yards from scrimmage (170.5), is pretty much the perfect candidate for this distinction — a 5-foot-10 former FCS guy (Sacramento State) who plays for a school whose games air primarily in the junkies-only time slots (a Thursday night opposite the NFL, a Friday night game that kicks off at 10:30 p.m. ET, etc.)
A few others for you: Washington State quarterback John Mateer, who’s on pace for 3,000 yards passing and 1,000 yards rushing; Texas Tech running back Tajh Brooks, currently No. 3 in rushing (135.8 yards per game) after finishing No. 4 last year; Syracuse running back LeQuint Allen, who trucks people; Army quarterback Bryson Daily (14 rushing TDs and six passing TDs) and Navy QB Blake Horvath (8.6 yards per carry); San Jose State receiver Nick Nash, who leads the country in receiving touchdowns (10); and UNLV linebacker Jackson Woodard, who seemingly makes every tackle (57) and interception (four).
By the way, the lead name on this list a year ago would have been then-New Mexico State quarterback Diego Pavia.
(Top photo: Alika Jenner / Getty Images)
