Friday, December 21, 2012
Pac-12 chat wrap
By Kevin Gemmell
If you're reading this, that means we're all still here and the Mayans got it wrong. If you're not, I wasted 20 minutes of my final day on earth compiling this for no reason. And that's kind of a bummer. As always, you can see the complete chat here.
JohnC (Portland): Mr. Gemmell,What effects, if any do you think the botched USC investigation will have on Oregon's sanctions? If it comes out that agents behaved unethically and unprofessionally, with this maybe prevent the NCAA from dropping the hammer on the Ducks? We're worried!
Kevin Gemmell (3:02 PM): That's a lot of "ifs." As Ted wrote this morning, you should be a little worried. I still don't think the sanctions are going to be that severe. This certainly escalates the situation into a different category. But But we don't know the specifics yet of why the NCAA wanted a hearing. Could be a conflict in Oregon's ideas of self-imposed sanctions. Could be the NCAA just wants to hear folks talk about it. Be worried, but not too worried... at least not yet.
Burke (NYC via Corvallis): If you were coaching the Beavs, who would you start at QB for the Beavs in the Alamo?
Kevin Gemmell (3:05 PM): I'm not in practice so I don't see how Mannion and Vaz are performing. I like that Mike Riley is stretching it out though. Gives him plenty of time to evaluate and it keeps Texas guessing. I've always thought Mannion was the better specimen for Riley's offense given his size and frame. Vaz seems to have the quicker delivery. They are both good quarterbacks so it's a good problem to have.
UCLA (LA): What do you think of Fuller wanting to go back to QB after the season? Any chance he takes a redshirt and saves some eligibility for when Hundley leaves?
Kevin Gemmell (3:07 PM): I like the moxie. But at some point he's going to have to realize that Hundley isn't going anywhere (assuming he stays healthy). Maybe Noel Mazzone can work out a wildcat package with Fuller tossing it a couple of times -- but he's a receiver. Time to start committing fully to the position and your role on the team.
Donald (Eugene): So by the time the Oregon mess gets worked out by the NCAA, the players, the AD and probably the coach involved with Lyles will be gone. So who would the NCAA be punishing? I know Oregon is not the first school with that same question.
Kevin Gemmell (3:13 PM): They will punish "the program." That's the way it goes. Current players pay for the sins of the past.
John (Boston): Kevin, you covered the Andrew Luck Stanford team last year. Even without him, they have had a great year. Do you think that the overall talent level of the team is better this year, as a result of the recruiting success? Playing that forward, do you think it will be better next year?
Kevin Gemmell (3:25 PM): The thing about Stanford recruiting is they don't have the luxury of saying "we need a wide receiver" or "we need a cornerback" and then go out and get him. They have to conform to certain academic standards. What they do is target position groups. Last year it was offensive linemen who meet the standards and they went out and got them. I think locking up Shaw was a good move though, because they guy can sell Stanford.
Utah Pride (UT): Do you see Utah becoming a dominant program in the Pac 12, being cyclically good and bad, or just never being able to put a complete season together due to opponent quality?
Kevin Gemmell (3:30 PM): Define dominant... as in dynasty? Winning consecutive titles? Going to BCS bowl games for three or four years in a row? Going to take some time. Never say never. Look at where Stanford was just five or six years ago and look where they are now. I would define them as a dominant program. I think it will take a while for Utah to fully get integrated. But I expect they'll be back in bowl contention next year.
Michael (San jose, ca): What's reasoning for Stanford not releasing the length of Shaw's contract extension? I understand not revealing dollar amount, but staying quiet about the years on the contract seems shady.
Kevin Gemmell (3:34 PM): Not shady, just what they do as a private school. Stanford has never released details of contracts. In this case, I think it's very intriguing because we don't really know how they value Shaw. It's great that they gave him an extension (he certainly deserves it), but how much do they value him? If they came out and said he was now "one of the top three highest paid coaches" in the league, we'd know just how much. As it stands, he could be fifth, sixth or 10th. We just don't know.
Greg (LA): If my Bruins beat Baylor, where do you see us being ranked to start the next season?
Kevin Gemmell (3:50 PM): I'd say Top 15 is probably fair.
Dan (Eugene): What position do the Ducks need to recruit the most heavily? Receivers really stepped up this year. Is it safety? OL?
Kevin Gemmell (3:55 PM): You always, always, always need to recruit offensive and defensive linemen. You can never, ever have too many. Certain years you can target certain position groups. But the lines should always be a top priority every single year.
David (Tree Fan in Seattle): Keep asking for your Rose Bowl comments. Where do the Badgers match up well and where do the Cardinal have the edge? What should I look for?
Kevin Gemmell (4:04 PM): Stanford has the edge in line play and the defensive front seven. Look for whether Stanford brings pressure or not. In the first meeting with UCLA, they didn't blitz as much as the Bruins had thought (confirmed to me by several members of the UCLA staff) and the second time around they had UCLA guessing. Keep an eye out for that.