It’s not too often that a player from a school without a whole lot of Heisman tradition can make a real, legitimate run at the trophy.

Cal’s Jahvid Best has a chance to do just that in 2009.

The true sophomore finished with 1,580 yards and 15 touchdowns this year while averaging a nation-best 8.1 yards per carry.   Since Reggie Bush came along, there’s been a lot of talk about this or that guy being the ‘next’ Bush, but Best is, I think, the closest thing to it.

Mind you, the guy is faster than Bush and, while not as shifty, could end up being a more complete running back.   He only had 194 carries this past season.  If he had gotten 50 more carries, you might’ve seen him break the 2,000-yard barrier.

The one drawback with Best is that, like a Ferrari, he’s always in the shop.  He has had a smattering of injuries that have slowed him down here and there.  To his credit, he has the toughness to fight through it.  But if he wants to compete for the Heisman next year, staying healthy is his most important task. I’d also like to see Cal make a concentrated early pitch on his behalf.  The last Cal back to crack 2,000 yards didn’t sniff the Heisman.  But Best is a different breed, the kind of guy who will produce highlight after highlight.  And he’s got a great name, to boot.

Right now, he’s the No. 1 2009 running back candidate.  By this time next year, he might be the ‘best’ overall player.

A lot of people didn’t like the hire of Gene Chizik at Auburn, but he went ahead and scored a coup by getting Gus Malzahn away from Tulsa.   That move pretty much assures Auburn will be on the cutting edge of offensive football in the coming years, which is exactly what it needed going head-to-head with the Saban juggernaut at Bama.

Question:  Does Charles Barkley know who Malzahn is?

Thanks to everyone for another great season.  Hope you and yours stay safe and enjoy the holiday season.

I’ll be back after Christmas with a look at the big bowl games and some of the internal data from the Heisman race.

Peace,

HP

It’s amazing how athletic directors at major universities just don’t do their homework when it comes to their most important task:  hiring, retaining and firing coaches.  We’ve already seen ridiculous hires this offseason like Lane Kiffin at Tennessee and Steve Sarkisian at Washington, but now it appears that Arizona’s 31-21 upset of BYU has enabled Mike Stoops to finagle his way to a contract extension .  The A.D. at Arizona calls it a ‘no-brainer.’  I do agree that someone with no brain could have made this decision just as easily.

On the surface, you look at Arizona this year and say "Hey, they went 8-5 and won their first bowl in a while, Stoops did a good job!"

A closer look, however, reveals that this is most likely the best Stoops will ever do at Arizona. And that, despite the confetti and hype from the nice win over BYU, 2008 was a missed opportunity for Arizona football.

First, let’s recap what has transpired since Stoops took over in Tucson.  He has gone 3-8, 3-8, 6-6, 5-7 and 8-5.  So this is his first winning season.

But how did he go 8-5 this year?

Well, first he played a non-conference schedule consisting of Idaho, Toledo and New Mexico.

Second, his team went 5-4 against the worst Pac-10 in at least the last 20 years.  Two of his wins in conference were against two of the worst teams in football–Washington and Washington State.  Two other wins were against teams (UCLA and ASU) that would, in any other year, be the two worst in the league (since those two teams each got two free wins against the Washington schools, they ended up 7th and 8th in the conference instead of 9th and 10th).

Third, he had a four-year starting quarterback leading an offense that tied for the most first-team all-conference selections and that also included the Pac-10′s all-time leading receiver.  Both the quarterback and the receiver were seniors.

Fourth, three of the four toughest games in conference were played in Tucson.

In other words, the schedule, the roster and the makeup of the league were set up in such a way that any coach with a modicum of ability should’ve been able to produce a 9-3 regular season, with a shot at a 10th win in the bowl and a subsequent national ranking.   This past year was set up on a silver platter for Stoops.  This was his year to strike!  Nine or 10 wins means you can go on the recruiting trail with confidence and perhaps parlay that into a top 10 or top 15 recruiting class.  Maybe 10 wins keeps guys like Devon Kennard in state.   If you get 10 wins, you become a hot program.

Instead, what actually happened is that Arizona suffered an embarrassing loss to New Mexico, got upset by Stanford and failed to ambush vulnerable USC and Oregon State teams at home.  The Wildcats ended up 2-3 against teams with winning records and 6-2 against teams with losing records.  Again, this happened with a veteran offense, a favorable schedule and a Pac-10 consisting of five teams under .500 (with two of the teams among the worst in conference history).

What is going to happen next season, when the Wildcats will replace Toledo and New Mexico with Central Michigan and Iowa;  when a new quarterback must be broken in and when Arizona must go on the road to face USC, Cal and Oregon State?

That’s right, you can expect Arizona to revert back to somewhere between 3-9 and 5-7.  Four years later, Stoops might go 7-5 again, but I’m not sure that’s what the Arizona athletic director is envisioning right now.  I bet he thinks, or at least pretends to think, that Stoops has turned the corner and that bowl games will now be a regularity in Tucson.   He’s in for a rude awakening.

The Pac-10 used to be a coaches conference, but a good 40 percent of the league’s coaches are not up to the task.  Adding more years to Stoops contract will only prolong that fact.   It’s a shame.