ESPN College Football

Posted by ESPN.com's Brian Bennett

Pete B from Somerset County, N.J., writes: I'd like to get some more information on your (recent) post regarding Anthony Davis being mostly hype (although full of potential). Last year, AD was a second-team All-Big East and was assigned weekly to the top defensive lineman on opposing teams. This year, this imposing physical speciman is in the best shape of his life (three years of RU stregnth training program) and is the anchor of a team that is considered to have the top O-line in the conference and one of the best in the nation. What gives, bro?

Brian Bennett: Pete, that comment was about a mock draft that had Davis pegged as the No. 16 overall pick in next year's draft. I like Davis a lot and think he had a good year last season. He has all the potential in the world. But has he played yet like the 16th-best NFL prospect in next year's draft, especially after only two years of college? I'd say not yet. My comment was directed more at the silliness of projecting NFL drafts nearly 10 months in advance.

Joshua S. from Tampa writes: As you know, South Florida had its best recruiting class singed this year. But I was curious how much the recent releases hurt that class. Is it still a Top 30 class?

Brian Bennett: The Bulls have had a handful of signees fail to qualify and decide to go elsewhere. This isn't really surprising. Remember that they signed 29 players, four over the NCAA limit, so there was going to be some attrition regardless. The good news for South Florida is that the players who didn't make it aren't the biggest stars in the class, like Jason Pierre-Paul, Ryne Giddins, Jamar Bass, Sam Barrington, Derrick Hopkins, et al. Losing one or more of those guys would have hurt. As to where this class ranks nationally, I have no idea. Ask me in four years.

Adam J. from Parsippany, N.J., writes: Brian, in your story about the Directors's Cup and what Seton Hall brings to the table, the answer is one thing: New Jersey. I guess you don't know the story, but when the Big East was being created in the late 1970's, Dave Gavitt went to Rutgers first. Rutgers, which was coming off a Final Four trip in 1976, flatly said NO. Gavitt, who really wanted a New Jersey presence for the new basketball league, then went to Seton Hall, who said yes.So, before you go bashing the Hall, at least understand how they ended up where they did.

Brian Bennett: I'm aware of the history, Adam, but I think it's fair to ask what Seton Hall brings to the table today. That's especially true in the context of the current Big East lineup, which has too many basketball members (16) and needs another football-playing school to balance out scheduling. Seton Hall has become irrelevant in basketball, and its Directors' Cup standings show that it isn't competing in other sports, either. Rutgers is the only New Jersey presence the Big East needs right now.

Steven from Harrisburg, Pa., writes: We know that West Virginia has the most talent in the league, but us West Virginia fans remember 2007. Pitt beat us soundly at our run game, but we're so much more balanced these days. We know you're picking Rutgers, but we feel that the championship comes through Morgantown. We don't care what Phill Steele has to say. Until you beat WVU at home, the scheduling means nothing. West Virginia is the class of the Big East, and Cincinnati or Rutgers still have more questions than the the best team in the Big East .... WVU.

Brian Bennett: I admire your passion and optimism, Steven. I don't know if West Virginia has the most talent in the Big East or not. That wasn't the case last year; all you have to do is look at the NFL draft. I'm still not sure who I'm picking to win the league, and the Mountaineers certainly deserve strong consideration. But let's not forget that Cincinnati won in Morgantown last year, and Pitt did so the year before. And West Virginia has to go to Rutgers this season.

Jay from Mineral Wells, W. Va, writes: In regards to last Friday's mailbag discussion between experienced O-line or backfield, the 2008 WVU team would go against your analysis. Last season, one preseason publication named WVU's offensive line as the best in the nation. All five starters were back but this group floundered. Maybe it was because of the new coaches/styles, but maybe not. It's not the coaching staff's fault that the team was so bad on third and short last season. Bottom line: an experienced OL doesn't equal a good offense.

Brian Bennett: It's an interesting point, though last year's West Virginia team didn't really fit the question, since the Mountaineers also had an experienced backfield with Pat White and Noel Devine. There's no debating, however, that the experienced and much-hyped offensive line played well below expectations last season. Was that because of the new offensive system, injuries in the preseason that hurt chemistry or just that everybody overrated that group (which produced no NFL draftees)? We may never know for sure. But your question does bring up the point that a lot of preseason prognostications go hog wild about returning starters. It makes sense, because that's about all you have to judge things on in the spring and early summer. But it doesn't translate into automatic success.