ESPN College Football

Oregon coach Chip Kelly told Eugene sports radio talk show host Steve Tannen Thursday that he never flip-flopped from the Ducks to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and back again last weekend, as reported in both Tampa and Oregon.

"The only decision I ever made was to not accept the job," Kelly said. "I never changed my mind. I never committed to the job and then flip-flopped."

You can listen to the full interview here.

First, response: Interesting, but it doesn't matter. He's still the Ducks' coach. End of story.

But as far as reading the entrails on this, there are four options you can choose from: 1) Kelly is telling the truth; 2) Kelly is lying; 3) Kelly is splitting hairs; 4) Kelly is shortly going to improve to 35-6 at Oregon and not 1-0 at Tampa Bay -- again, end of story.

Whatever Kelly said on the radio, lots of people believed Sunday night that he was headed to Tampa. It's possible -- and perhaps likely in some way -- that Kelly gave a strong indication to principals on both ends that he was leaning toward Tampa and away from Eugene, but when it came time to put pen to paper he got cold feet, likely considering the spiraling void of darkness that would ensue without regular chats with the Pac-12 blog. "Eeek," he said. "Can't do it."

Yes, no one can prove that Kelly didn't return to Oregon because the Pac-12 blog has very little interaction with the coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Just as no one can prove that Kelly said "yes" to Tampa before he said "no."

Why is it important whether Kelly flip-flopped or not? In either scenario, he turned down a hefty raise to remain at Oregon. So this flirtation wasn't about contract leverage, and it's reasonable to conclude that money isn't solely driving him. An interesting tidbit from the Eugene Register-Guard:

Kelly pointed out that his decision "obviously wasn't financial, because I turned it down and it was more than I got paid." The Register-Guard has reported that Kelly received a contract extension but that his deal with the Ducks wasn't otherwise dramatically overhauled.

Further, Kelly got to cite a heart-warming reason for returning: "... the relationships I have with the current coaches on our staff and the players was the underlying reason why I came back."

Oregon fans can look at this any way they like, but I'd rate it a win-win for Kelly and Oregon.

The football nation -- NFL and college -- got to see how highly Kelly is held in esteem. Multiple NFL pundits, including former Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy, have said of late that Kelly would be a good NFL coach. Kelly's star, which is already high, just climbed a bit higher. That's good for him, of course, but it's also good for Oregon as long as Kelly is in Eugene.

Some have said Kelly's flirtation would hurt recruiting. They are not only wrong; the opposite is true.

Players respect superstar coaches. Recall that, in his heyday, Florida State's Bobby Bowden used to crush it the final week of recruiting with that last in-home visit. So did Pete Carroll. So does Nick Saban, etc. Oregon fans, not satisfied with winning three consecutive conference titles, want to move up the recruiting rankings. Lots of five-star guys -- in 2012-13 and beyond -- just learned a little bit more about Kelly.

The NFL banging on Kelly's door makes him more of a star, and that will play well in living rooms, much more so than the idea that Kelly might leave for an NFL job at some point.

Further, some have tried to diminish Kelly as a "system" coach. In recruiting, some coaches say that Oregon is a great program but it's not an NFL feeder with pro-style schemes. Well, now there's clear evidence the NFL thinks highly of Kelly and his systems.

The key thing on the Oregon end of things: It will be a huge mistake if the Ducks' top boosters -- Phil Knight, et al. -- want to get grumpy over this. Creating friction to make a point about loyalty or acting wounded will only hasten Kelly's exit. And hurt the program.

The most interesting aspect coming out of this was detailed in this column from George Schroeder: Oregon's potential succession plan would have made offensive coordinator Mark Helfrich the head coach.

Helfrich is highly respected, but I'd always thought he'd have to leave for another job -- and call his own plays -- to escape Kelly's considerable shadow and land a head-coaching gig. Schroeder's column shows that the same folks who quickly and accurately identified Kelly's rising star believe Helfrich is made of the same coaching stuff.

So just as Kelly's star rose this week, and Oregon fans got a huge relief after it stayed in the Eugene sky, so did Helfrich's. Know that more than a few ADs at some AQ schools added his name to their list of coaches to watch.

What the heck are we supposed to do Saturday?

Follow me on Twitter.

A couple of Oregon fans talk to an SEC defense about Auburn QB Cam Newton.

Dirk from Auburn: Do you really think the Duckies can keep up with an SEC team in the national championship game. This is big boy football and the SEC is the big boys.

Ted Miller: Poor ole Duckies. I just hope they get out of Glendale alive!

If I may humbly speak for Oregon and the Pac-10, we are just grateful that the SEC has allowed the conference to step on the field -- for one shining moment! -- with the big boys.

SEC teams are so big. So absolutely huge. Gosh, we're all really impressed over here, I can tell you that. Forgive us, for this, our dreadful toadying and barefaced flattery. But you are so strong and, well, just so super. Fantastic. Amen.

Dave from Florence, Ore., writes: Ted, assuming both the Rodgers brothers are back, with Ryan Katz having a bit more experience, plus a lighter non-conference schedule, how do you see Oregon State doing next year?

Ted Miller: Not that much lighter on the ole schedule: at Wisconsin and BYU are the nonconference games (with a TBA remaining that, hopefully, won't be filled with a top-five team).

Hey, Beavers, ever thought of playing San Jose State or Utah State or New Mexico State or something?

The Beavers offense should be much improved: QB Ryan Katz in his second year, both Rodgers brothers back, a good crew of receivers and (cross your fingers) better O-line play with four starters back. A good start on the line would be a healthy Michael Philipp at guard, not tackle.

The bigger issue is defense. It loses its best players: DT Stephen Paea -- that leaves a HUGE hole in the D-line -- LBs Dwight Roberson and Keith Pankey, CB James Dockery and DE Gabe Miller. No returning defensive player even earned honorable mention All-Pac-10 honors from the coaches. The Beavers thrive when they play high-pressure defense. Where's the pressure going to come from next year? Dominic Glover? Taylor Henry? A JC transfer. We'll see.

I love Katz's upside, and James Rodgers paired with Markus Wheaton is a nice combo at receiver, but the offense may have to outscore folks, particularly early on as the defense figures itself out. Still, there is no clear No. 2 behind Oregon in the Pac-12 North. If there are some "changes" at Stanford -- goodbye Andrew Luck and Jim Harbaugh -- then the Beavers might even end up picked No. 2.

Owen from Palo Alto, Calif., writes: Hey Ted, a chat with many contenders for awards ran today and Andrew Luck took some questions. When asked about the draft, he said, "It's not a distraction because I'm putting it off until after the bowl game to think about it." However, when asked about the new Pac-12 alignment, he said, "It's going to be fun to have the opportunity to play Utah and Colorado now and have a championship game," and "I'm excited to have the opportunity to go play Colorado and Utah." How far should we read into this, if at all?

Ted Miller: How far? Perhaps one inch.

Luck goes to Stanford. He's smart. He knows that if a reporter asks him about next season, he's not going to go, "I haven't thought about it because I'm going to be in the NFL... oops!"

And think about it: If he indeed hasn't thought about it -- come on! -- then he should talk about next year as if he were still going to be on the Farm.

If Luck enters the draft, he almost certainly would be the No. 1 overall pick. He's a franchise NFL QB in the grand sense of the word (and his character, humility and social skills -- he's a funny guy -- will take him far as the "face" of a franchise).

I'd rate his chances of returning at about three percent.

Pierce from Tempe, Ariz., writes: Given the injury to Tuinei and Huff filling in, I count at least 7 starters for the Oregon offense, 8 if you want to count a combination of Weems, York, and Asper, who have all started and played at both tackle and guard.I also count at the very least 6 returning starters: Turner, Kaddu, Harris, Gildon, Boyett, and Pleasant. The Oregon depth chart also notes that Dion Jordan and Wade Keliikipi have registered starts on the D-Line. Onto the question. Do you think that because of the pace of Oregon and the necessity of substitutions that basing predictions based on returning starters is something to be leery of?

Ted Miller: "Official" returning starters started at least five games, so Weems could be considered a returning starter. But, as I said, when I calculated returning starters, I was looking at end-of-season depth charts and not working my way through those calculations -- or factoring in injuries.

Yes, returning starters isn't a foolproof way to measure teams, particularly when a team -- such as Oregon -- plays a lot of guys. Nonetheless, we have to make distinctions.

And, for example, losing Brandon Bair and Kenny Rowe -- the Ducks two best D-linemen -- is a blow. They are proven, productive guys. Sure, their backups saw action. But let me put it this way. Can you name them right now?

Raymond from Tucson writes: Arizona loses two coaches to Colorado:From a Fans perspective which also means its an outsiders perspective. Can I blame coaches for leaving the spastic and over the top personality of Mike Stoops? How much can an adult take of child like antics?Arizona players have been quoted to say Stoops over-charged, in your face, ready to explode behavior gets them pumped-up. I wonder if the coaching staff shares the same perspective? Cool Hand Luke type coaches over the years have displayed poker face and chess like thinking behavior with great success. Tom LaundryBill WalshTony Dungy.I dont expect Coach Stoops to act like the list above because its not in his nature. But it would be nice to see some self control to possibly eliminate sideline confusion.If I see the confusion so does the opposing team.

Ted Miller: Yes, Mike Stoops is very animated on the sidelines. He seemed more animated this year than last, and more than a few times he probably wishes he had been less animated.

Does Stoops' hyperkinetic way on the sidelines bother some Arizona fans? Yes. Do I think athletic director Greg Byrne wishes Stoops would chill a bit? Yes. Does Stoops intensity bother some of his assistant coaches? Maybe, though it's not like football coaches are a bunch of shrinking violets.

If Stoops asked my opinion, I'd say he might want to ratchet it back a bit. But, to be honest, I find it entertaining. It's sorta his thing. Like I said: It bothers some folks a little. And it bothers some a lot.

But on the list of things college coaches do that are bad, I'd rate rate Stoops' sideline behavior somewhere in the mid-90s, two or three notches below below a coach talking about himself in the third person.

John from Oregon writes: Now that all the bowl games are set, say the Cam Newton is found guilty and is suspended. and if they punish not only Newton, but Auburn too and make them forfeit their wins, then who would be playing for the National Championship? Would they leave it and claim Oregon as the Champion?

Ted Miller: Don't worry. This won't happen.

The NCAA made a quick ruling that Newton is eligible. The larger investigation will take months. And months.

Tyler from Tucson writes: Why, oh why, did the Wildcats' DE Ricky Elmore not make the 1st Team All-Pac-10 Defense team?

Jake from Midland, Texas writes: What's the deal with the snub of Washington State WR Marquess Wilson for Pac-10 offensive Freshman of the Year?

Ted Miller: Two of my toughest choices, and I've had some post-decision regret over USC's Robert Woods over Marquess Wilson.

With Elmore, who would you kick off my D-line? He started fast and had a long lull before playing well vs. Arizona State. What clinched it was the coaches picking fellow Wildcats DE Brooks Reed ahead of Elmore. I'd probably rate them No. 5 and No. 6 among my D-linemen.

As for Wilson: I saw Woods a lot this year. He's really impressive. I didn't see as much of Wilson. That made a difference. While Wilson's numbers were better as a receiver, Woods was pushed over the top by his work returning kicks.

Am I certain that I wouldn't pick Wilson over Woods if I did the team again Saturday? No.

But Cougars fans should want Wilson to be angry about the slight. That should motivate him during the offseason.

Andrew from Portland writes: I'm traveling to the Natty with a bunch of friends and fellow Duck alum. For all of us that have never been to the Glendale/Phoenix area, can you put together a little travel guide for us since you're a resident of the area? Specifically, can you tell me (1) what area to book a hotel (I've heard that Scottsdale is the way to go, even though it's somewhat far from the stadium), (2) what bars/nightlife to go to, and (3) restaurants to eat at?

Ted Miller: I live in North-North Scottsdale, near Cave Creek and Carefree. That's a ways from Glendale. And the wife and I don't get out much because The Lord of Miller Manor just turned two, and he yells a lot -- he makes Stoops look like he's asleep.

The good news about our location: We are a short drive from the best restaurant in the state of Arizona: Binkley's. It's a special event sort of place -- if you run into Phil Knight and he says, "Hey, can I buy you dinner?" This is where you go.

Even closer to Miller Manor: Spotted Donkey. Really enjoy that place. Down south in civilization, we've had good luck with these guys. I haven't been here yet, but it's high on the to-go list. This is good nuts and bolts Mexican, and you might run into a bunch of sportswriters -- this guy and this guy always go there. These guys offer good steaks and their Ocean Club -- part of the chain -- is good for seafood and a cool scene. This place is old school Phoenix.

If I were coming to town, I would stay near downtown Scottsdale -- it's where all the cool stuff happens. Good restaurants and bars. Good scene.

Here's a entry from the preseason -- a fan survey of best restaurants and bars around the Pac-10 -- though a couple of Arizona State fans were later critical of it.

Hope this gets you started. By the way, it's 71 degrees today.

Brrrr.

Grant from Claremont, Calif., writes: Great article on Chip Kelly!

Daniel from Eugene, Ore., writes: I was wondering why you didn't include this story in your lunchtime links? It's a brief little article about DJ Davis' tribute to Declan Sullivan from the Civil War. Considering the bad pub that a lot of our players got after the Rose Bowl last years (and rightfully so), it's nice to see stories about the good things our players do as well.

Mudpuppy from Eugene writes: You should check out the myth of Auburn's size advantage posted by our friends at Addicted to Quack.

Ted Miller: All three worth noting.

Oregon's class of 23 ranked 22nd in the nation and included four players in the ESPNU 150.

Coach Chip Kelly said the Ducks class was all about speed, and he signed five players ranked among the top-13 at their respective positions in the country.

Top prospects: Running back Lache Seastrunk is a fast guy who can catch the ball. Tight end was a need position, and Curtis White should immediately help fill that need. Cornerback also was a need area, so Dior Mathis figures to be in the mix. While Kelly quibbled with the idea the Ducks are thin on the defensive line, tackle Ricky Heimuli was as important a signing as any member of the class.

Under the radar: Kelly was quick to point out quarterback Bryan Bennett's track numbers to counter the idea that he was a drop-back passer instead of a spread-option guy. Kelly projected Hroniss Grasu as a center and lauded him as an athlete. Josh Huff and Eric Dungy are athletes who could play on either side of the ball.

Issues? The class could have been stronger on the defensive line, particularly with ends Gabe King (California) and Owamagbe Odighizuwa (UCLA) playing high school ball in the state. The Ducks also were in on elite tackle Dominique Easley until he opted for Florida.

Notes: Heimuli is likely to take a two-year Mormon mission after his freshman season. ... Dungy is the son of former NFL coach Tony Dungy. This column explains how he ended up signing with Oregon. ... Receiver Keanon Lowe first committed to Washington. ... Drew Howell will be a long-snapper. ... Class included players from nine states.

USC fans will want to move on quickly from Pete Carroll's expected departure, per ESPN's Adam Schefter, to the good news of a big-name replacement.

It may not be that easy.

First of all, the early scuttlebutt points to three candidates: Oregon State's Mike Riley, Tennessee Titans coach Jeff Fisher and Jacksonville Jaguars coach Jack Del Rio.

To those names, reporters will line up the usual suspects: Boise State's Chris Petersen, TCU's Gary Patterson, Stanford's Jim Harbaugh and Utah Kyle Whittingham. Or maybe Herm Edwards? Or Tony Dungy? Or Mike Leach!

So there are some names. An impressive list, yes?

Ah, but there's a big issue in advance of pursuing candidates: Who's in charge of the search?

Will USC -- and its powerful boosters -- entrust this search to embattled athletic director Mike Garrett?

Early indications are Garrett will be in charge, but that might -- or should -- make Trojans fans nervous.

Let's first recall that Garrett's hire of Carroll, for which he has always enjoyed taking credit, wasn't entirely about a prescient and savvy evaluation of a man's character and a skill set. It was more like hitting a number on the roulette wheel or winning the lottery.

It was lucky.

Carroll was far from the first choice -- most accounts list him at No. 4 behind Riley, Dennis Erickson and Mike Bellotti -- and the hire was greeted with derision by many pundits, who saw the decision as a sign of desperation.

Obviously, the pundits were wrong, and Garrett deserves some credit for his desperation call hitting the jackpot.

But is there confidence that Garrett can hit the winning number twice, particularly when his own job is in jeopardy, as Michael Lev of the Orange County Register pointed out?

Sure, his hire of Carroll helped an athletic department that was hemorrhaging money balanced the books due to a boom in football revenue, but little else has gone well in the Trojans athletic department under his watch. Both the basketball and football programs are presently the subject of NCAA investigations, and the NCAA might look favorably on Garrett being held accountable for the questionable oversight in recent years.

(Just as the NCAA will look favorably on the next coach having impeccable character and, if he's a college coach, a clean sheet on NCAA compliance issues).

Moreover, with school president Steven Sample retiring in August, the new president might want to hire his own guy to oversee an athletic department in transition.

It's not unfair, therefore, to wonder if this critical hire is going to be made by a lame duck athletic director. And to question the wisdom of that course of action.

Still, the need to make a quick, decisive move is critical. There's less than a month until national signing day, and a new staff needs to be in place to fight for what appears at this point to be a good -- if not great -- recruiting class.

Know that Pac-10 and other coaches are eagerly dialing up players presently committed to USC, seeing if perhaps Carroll's departure will inspire a wandering eye.

Know that UCLA coach Rick Neuheisel, in particular, senses that, hey, the football monopoly in LA might actually be over.

What's the ideal scenario for USC?

Identify a top candidate that will be met with widespread approval and will generate positive momentum for the program. Quickly ascertain if he wants the job in order to avoid the embarrassing rejections that preceded Carroll's hire.

Hire him.

Easier said than done.

Posted by ESPN.com's Ted Miller

The mailbag likes diversity, but there wasn't much this week.

Lots of California. Lots of Washington got screwed. Lots of LeGarrette Blount.

California fans were shaking their fist at the heavens. And some folks were eager to tell me how stupid I was for overrating the Bears. Not sure how I can respond other than, "Yep."

As for the Huskies gripes with the officials: Mostly valid. But the territory feels sort of stale. Look forward, Huskies! Arizona's visit is a critical game in the Pac-10 pecking order.

Took one Blount question.

And away we go.

Jeff from Dallas writes: Theoretically speaking, if the Ducks win out, would they have a chance at breaking into the top 5? If so, would we jump Boise State? I know I'm getting way ahead of myself here but as a loyal Duck fan, I cant help but set myself up for heartache.

Ted Miller: Yes and yes.

At 11-1, with a win over USC, the Ducks likely would be top-five. Now, would Oregon jump Boise State if the Broncos remained unbeaten?

I think so. Why? Because Oregon's schedule is exponentially tougher -- none of Boise State's other 12 foes would finish in the top-half of the Pac-10. More than a few are among the worst FBS teams.

Moreover, season-openers are often treated differently than games in the middle or end of the season, and not just because of rankings momentum. The Ducks are clearly a better team today than they were in the season-opener.

I know that won't go over with Broncos fans but there is a solution: Schedule a BCS foe early and late -- even if they won't do a home-and-home series.

If Boise State played, say, Kansas -- I pick Kansas because the Jayhawks would hide behind the sofa if Boise called for a game -- on Dec. 5 instead of New Mexico State, thereby bookending their season with legitimate BCS foes, it would make up for the perception that the Broncos poured their hearts into one season-opening game and then coasted through a milquetoast schedule.

---

Mike from Berkeley writes: As a Cal fan I have nothing but respect for what Coach Tedford has achieved. He took over a program that was a perennial doormat in the Pac-10 and made it relevant. That said 2007 was a major disappointment, and while Cal will probably finish with 9 or 10 wins this season that is a major disappointment given the talent level. So do you think Tedford can ever lead the bears to the Rose Bowl? If not do you think another coach could, or will Cal just never have the recruiting power to reach that level?

Ted Miller: Remember when Nebraska fans use to say that about Tom Osborne?

Bobby Bowden went 10-2 in 1977, his second year at Florida State. Before he won his first national title in 1993, his team rolled through six consecutive "disappointing" seasons of 10 or more wins.

Mack Brown just couldn't win the big won. Then he did.

Is Jeff Tedford the coaching "genius" he was touted as in 2004? Probably not. Is it fair to question how he coaches and who he hires and other aspects of his job? Sure. He makes a lot of money and that comes with the territory.

The quarterback magic has worn off. The "failing to live up to high expectations" issue feels more legitimate today than it ever has.

But to your question as to whether Tedford can lead the Bears to the Rose Bowl: Absolutely.

If Tedford remains the Bears coach for another decade, I guarantee the Bears will go to the Granddaddy during that span. [Cut that out and we'll meet back here in 2019].

And to your final question: Yes, another coach probably could do better.

Urban Meyer could. Pete Carroll probably could. Nick Saban maybe (he'd be out of his element on the West Coast). Bill Belichick is another possibility. Maybe Tony Dungy would come out of retirement.

But if Cal doesn't feel its chances are good to hire one of those guys, my advice would be to stick with the coach who got the long-suffering program consistently inside the velvet ropes.

---

Spencer from LA writes: It turns out LeGarrette Blount lawyered up. And what about that fake apology? The real story isn't that Chip Kelly changed his mind, it's that he was forced to by the fear of a lawsuit.

Ted Miller: You refer to this story.

That was a valid story, reported straight by Mark Fainaru-Wada, one half of the combination that broke open the story of steroids in sports and wrote the landmark book, "Game of Shadows."

But this is a prime example of the need to read between the lines.

First, let's say a lawyer was brought in to force Oregon to reconsider Blount's season-long suspension. What was that lawyer going to do? Where was his traction? What was the legal argument?

The only thing I can think of would be the different treatment given Oregon point guard Aaron Brooks when he clubbed Washington's Ryan Appleby during a game.

You'll also note that the actual lawyer, Rob Carey, had no comment.

Who did comment? A guy named Chris Horn, whose apparent motive for talking is a desire for publicity for his "newly formed nonprofit designed to advocate for student-athletes."

He's a -- to use his phrase -- "quiet voices in the background" guy. Only he's shouting "look at me!"

Maybe Horn did help Blount (that's not my take, but let's give him the benefit of the doubt). The problem is Horn's subsequent publicity-seeking is a disservice to Blount.

The story before Horn went public was that Blount had earned the opportunity to possibly play again this season because of how he had behaved after his meltdown at Boise State. How he responded to his worst moment had won over coach Chip Kelly and Oregon administrators.

It's a redemption story.

Horn, instead, wants the story to be that he and Blount's parents pressured Oregon into changing their position. He wants everyone to know that.

It's about lawyers and potential lawsuits.

So which story helps Blount get to the NFL?

If Kelly and Oregon feel like they were pressured, or are embarrassed by Horn going public with his account, do you think they are going to support Blount's cause when NFL GMs call?

And I know Kelly well enough to know that if he feels lawyered up and pushed around, Blount won't see significant action even if he manages to get reinstated.

By the way, no one at Oregon backs up Horn's account. An anonymous source in Fainaru-Wade's story is quoted as saying that Blount "met with Harry Edwards for 10 minutes." Edwards said he talked to Blount for six hours.

And if this is mostly about the Ducks wanting to get back a star player who can help them win, why will they wait until Nov. 7 -- after the USC game -- to allow his earliest possible reinstatement? Heck, if the program had the threat of a lawsuit as potential cover, why not bring him back for the Oct. 24 date at Washington? A five-game suspension is a nice number, and that would give Blount a warmup game before the Trojans come to town.

As for Blount's letter of apology, yes, it doesn't read like he wrote it.

I respect how Oregon has handed this process, both in the early going and during the redirection. I'm rooting for LeGarrette Blount to get his life back in order.

I'm not sure this third-party advocacy has much merit.

---

(Read full post)