Thursday, December 8, 2011

The Swan Song for Two Legends



When I was a boy in Arkansas, as I have written here before, I was a fan of the Arkansas Razorbacks — like nearly everyone else.

Many of my earliest memories are of Saturday afternoons at my friends' houses — where, more often than not, the Razorback play–by–play could be heard on the radio in the kitchen or the living room.

I'm still a Razorback fan, but many things are different for me now. Yet, sometimes, when the breeze blows just so or I catch the scent of honeysuckle in the evening air or I feel a slight chill after an autumn rain shower, my memory bank conjures up, however briefly, a snippet from my childhood.

Most of the time, I don't remember the game or the circumstances — or the names of people whose faces I can see in my mind's eye for a second or two.

I only know that it is a link to a time that was early in my life, when things seemed more reliable, more stable.

Maybe that was one of the things that I always liked about the Razorbacks. They were reassuringly constant. They almost always had competitive teams, and I always got excited when Arkansas and Texas were about to play.

I guess you could say there were three things that I felt I could count on in those days:
  • Frank Broyles was the coach of the Razorbacks. There had never been any other head coach at Arkansas in my lifetime.

  • Darrell Royal was the coach of the Longhorns. There had never been any other head coach at Texas in my lifetime.

  • The Arkansas–Texas football game was always televised. (That wasn't as routine as it might seem to 21st century football fans, who are used to the idea that most of their favorite team's games will be televised. There was no cable in those days, and there were restrictions on the number of regular–season TV appearances a team could have.)
Probably the most memorable of the Arkansas–Texas games in my childhood was the one played in December 1969. It is remembered as the "Great Shootout," and it was so big it brought the president of the United States to tiny Fayetteville, Ark.

I may be wrong, but I believe that, until native Arkansan Bill Clinton came to dedicate a statue on the UA campus, it was the only time a sitting president ever came to Fayetteville.

That game, I must say, was not an example of stability — and not only because it drew higher–profile attendees than usual.

Ordinarily, Arkansas and Texas met in mid–October — but, because everyone figured they were the two best teams in the country, they were persuaded to move their 1969 game to the first week in December, when no other games would be played (this was a couple of decades before conferences started holding championship games), and the attention of the nation would be on that game alone.

And, in fact, the gamble paid off. It turned out that Texas was ranked #1 in the nation and Arkansas was ranked #2 when they met in Fayetteville on that December day. The winner would go to the Cotton Bowl to play Notre Dame for the national title, but the president was on hand to prematurely proclaim the winner the national champion.

When the game was over, I remember watching President Nixon gush about the Longhorns as he presented them with a national championship plaque that he said would be engraved with the winning school's name — and I noted bitterly that he hadn't said anything about the Razorbacks, who had shut out the Longhorns for the first three quarters.

If Texas was the best team in the nation, I reasoned, Arkansas was nearly as good. The Longhorns beat the Razorbacks by a single point that day.

I didn't dream that, nearly seven years later to the day, in another Arkansas–Texas game that had been moved to December, Broyles and Royal would leave the sidelines together for the last time.

I'm not sure if I ever knew the reasons why Arkansas and Texas agreed to move their 1976 game to early December. They had shared the Southwest Conference championship with Texas A&M the year before, and perhaps the ABC executives were gambling that, as in 1969, the two would be the best teams in the conference — if not the nation.

If that was the gamble, though, it came up way short of expectations. Arkansas and Texas tumbled out of contention early that season. Newcomer Houston won the conference title and went to the Cotton Bowl. Neither Arkansas nor Texas played in a bowl game that season so 35 years ago last weekend, the coaching careers of Broyles and Royal came to an end.

I don't know when or why those two men decided to retire from coaching. It just always seemed right that they did so at the same time. I couldn't imagine watching another Arkansas–Texas game and seeing one but not both on the sidelines.

Both continued to influence athletics as the athletic directors at the schools where they had built their coaching reputations.

And Broyles, at least, continued to wield the kind of power that successful football coaches in small states tend to wield. During his coaching days — and afterward, as athletic director — Broyles was, arguably, the most influential individual in Arkansas — more powerful than governors or senators, more revered than ministers (and, in devoutly religious Arkansas, that truly is saying something).

Broyles retired a few years ago. He's still living — he'll be 87 the day after Christmas — and, while he may still be an influential figure within Arkansas, outside the state one hears little about him anymore.

Royal marked his 87th birthday last summer. One hears even less of him. After he stopped coaching, he continued, as Broyles did, to serve as the school's athletic director, but only for a few years. Texas re–named its football stadium in his honor, and you hear his name mentioned whenever the Longhorns play in big games, but he has mostly remained out of the spotlight for the last three decades.

He now serves as a special assistant to the UT president — which sounds a lot like professor emeritus. If that is, indeed, what it is, he earned the honor, winning nearly three–quarters of the college games in which he coached.

Likewise, Broyles enjoyed a successful coaching career. He won more than two–thirds of his games, and he remains the only Arkansas football coach to win 100 or more games.

Current coach Bobby Petrino would have to win every regular season game, every conference championship game and every postseason bowl game from now until the end of this decade to match Broyles — and, since Broyles' 1964 team was the last Arkansas team to go through an entire season without losing, it seems likely that Petrino would have to remain at Arkansas well beyond 2019.

Even at his present pace (10 wins in each of the last two seasons), it would take Petrino until the year 2023.

Of course, if he manages to do that, he is sure to replace Broyles as the most powerful man in Arkansas — by which time, Broyles is likely to be deceased or far too old to care. In the immediate future, though, Broyles' status is secure.

Royal is also the winningest coach in Texas history, but the current coach, 60–year–old Mack Brown, needs only 35 wins to pass him.

In 2005, Brown became the second Texas coach to win a national championship. Royal was the first, and he went on to win three of them. Brown needs two more to match him.

No matter how you slice it, Broyles and Royal are living legends, and, for many long–time fans of both schools, their legacies are intertwined, like the epic boxing duels between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier or the tennis matches between Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova or the Triple Crown races between Affirmed and Alydar.

It was fitting that they ended their coaching careers together.

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

History's Spotlight



Perhaps it is fitting that this year's Heisman Trophy race is expected, by many observers, to be one of the closest ever.

Whoever the winner turns out to be, it's likely to be fodder for one of those "what–if" debates.

I suppose that is the most intriguing thing about the study of history — the wide variety of the "what if" questions.

You can find them taking many shapes in every human endeavor — politics, religion, sports, the arts, everything.

Most of the time, they are along the lines of the road not taken — sort of like the Burt Lancaster character in "Field of Dreams." But sometimes there are the tragic tales of those who did not live long enough to realize their full potential.

Today is the 50th anniversary of such a milestone in one such life story.

On this day in 1961, Ernie Davis was the first black man to be awarded the Heisman.

That isn't a "what–if" — unless you're thinking of the guys who were on the ballot with Davis.

It was the second–closest vote in Heisman history, with Davis beating the runnerup, Ohio State fullback Bob Ferguson, by only 53 votes.

Texas' Jimmy Saxton, Minnesota's Sandy Stephens and Alabama's Pat Trammell rounded out the top five.

It capped what must have been one of the greatest football careers of all time. In 1959, as a sophomore, Davis led Syracuse to a national championship and was named MVP of the Cotton Bowl. In 1961, as a senior, he was MVP of the Liberty Bowl, and everyone thought his career would continue into the NFL.

Davis seemed to be a great natural talent for whom the NFL was the next logical step. If the Super Bowl had existed at the time, speculation probably would have centered on when, not if, he would play in it — and how many times he would return.

In 1962, he was drafted by the Washington Redskins, who quickly dealt him to the Cleveland Browns. The Redskins were owned by George Preston Marshall, who was known to be racist.

The Redskins were the last NFL franchise to resist signing black players, which Marshall defended as being based on sound business strategy. He said he wanted to maintain good relations with the Southern market.

In Cleveland, Davis was expected to be paired with Jim Brown to form what may well have been the most potent running game in NFL history.

But no one will ever know how great that backfield could have been. In the summer of 1962, Davis was diagnosed with leukemia, and he died the following year at the age of 23. He never played a down in the NFL.

Brown was Syracuse's star halfback before Davis came along; in fact, Brown helped recruit Davis, who went on to break all of Brown's school records.

And Cleveland was reasonably successful even without Davis in the early to mid–1960s — until Brown retired. More than 40 years later, Brown was recognized as the greatest pro football player of all time by The Sporting News.

But other teams, most notably the Packers, climbed the mountain ahead of the Browns.

Davis played at a time when freshmen were not allowed to play varsity ball. In the three years that he could play varsity ball, he was named first–team All–America twice.

How much greater could the Browns have been with Davis in the backfield?

It may not be one of history's greatest "what–if" questions, but it's got to be near the top of the list for sports.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Hoping for Turmoil at the Top



Well, conference championship weekend is upon us.

And, being as anti–BCS as I am, I'm still hoping for some upsets that can spark a real debate over who deserves to play for the national title and who doesn't.

Right now, it appears that LSU is the clear choice for one of the slots — but what if LSU loses to Georgia this weekend?

Should Alabama be allowed to play for the national title whether LSU is there or not? Alabama won't play for its conference championship, and 'Bama's coach said, several years ago, that no team that did not play for its conference championship should be allowed to play for a national title.

What if some of the other highly ranked teams should falter this weekend? What if #3 Oklahoma State loses to Oklahoma? What if #5 Virginia Tech loses to Clemson? What if the only remaining unbeaten team is Houston and the only remaining one–loss teams are Boise State, Stanford and Alabama, none of which will play for a conference title this weekend?

That's the kind of thing that can make a playoff system more likely in college football.

And that's what I want.

Idle: #2 Alabama, #4 Stanford, #6 Arkansas, #9 USC, #14 South Carolina, #17 Michigan, #20 Nebraska, #23 Penn State, #25 Florida State

Thursday
  • #22 West Virginia at USF, 7 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: The home team wins this game two–thirds of the time – literally.

    They've played each other six times, three times at each school, and the home teams have won two of the three.

    I'm inclined to think the home team will prevail again. Give me USF — by a point or two.
Friday
  • UCLA at #8 Oregon, 7 p.m. (Central) on FOX: Historically, UCLA has won nearly 61% of its games with Oregon.

    But recent history has favored the Ducks. Although the schools didn't face each other during the regular season this year, Oregon has a three–game winning streak against UCLA, and the Ducks have beaten the Bruins in eight of the 10 games they have played since 2000.

    Even more recently, Oregon beat USC, 38–35, on Nov. 19. The following week, USC blanked UCLA, 50–0.

    If USC wasn't on a suspension from postseason activity, the Trojans would be playing Oregon for the Pac–12 title in a rematch of their Nov. 19 thriller. And that would be a game worth watching.

    But UCLA finished second in that division and took the championship game berth in USC's place.

    I expect Oregon to win by at least four touchdowns. If UCLA keeps the deficit below that, that will be the upset.
Saturday
  • #12 Georgia vs. #1 LSU at Atlanta, 3 p.m. (Central) on CBS: This will be the third time in the last decade that these teams have played for the SEC championship.

    That series is currently tied, 1–1.

    Historically, LSU holds a three–game edge in its series with Georgia, 15–12–1, but in the last 20 years, it is Georgia that holds a three game advantage, 6–3 (including the conference championship games).

    And I think Georgia is capable of giving LSU a pretty good run this time. After all, the Bulldogs' offense is 34th in the country, but it's hard to see how it can be too productive against the second–best defense in the land.

    When LSU has the ball, it is hard to see how its 62nd–ranked offense can be very imposing — and Georgia's fifth–ranked defense seems well prepared for the task of stopping it.

    It's just plain hard to give Georgia the benefit of the doubt on anything.

    LSU has been facing top–notch teams all year, teams that are still ranked as the season draws to a close — Oregon, West Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas — and has beaten all comers.

    Georgia, on the other hand, faced none of those teams. Its two early losses were to teams that were and remain ranked, but it didn't play any of the SEC West's Big Three — LSU, Alabama or Arkansas — during the regular season.

    You can make a convincing argument that Georgia hasn't really been challenged since mid–September. I guess I'm suceptible to that because I'm so anti–BCS and would love to see anything that hastens its demise.

    Georgia is a double–digit underdog in this game, but I'm still going to pick Georgia — albeit hopefully — in a conference championship weekend upset special.

  • #13 Oklahoma at #3 Oklahoma State, 7 p.m. (Central) on ABC: This will be the 100th meeting between these schools, but victories for Oklahoma State have been, to put it mildly, rare.

    Currently, OU owns an eight–game winning streak in the series — which looks impressive to people outside Oklahoma.

    Speaking as someone who lived in Oklahoma for four years, I can tell you that the current winning streak is dwarfed by others in the series. Between 1967 and 1991, Oklahoma beat Oklahoma State in every year but one (1976). From 1946 to 1964, the Sooners won every encounter — 19 in all.

    Most people seem to be picking OSU to win this game, and it isn't hard to see why. The Cowboys are ranked third in the country in offense, and they've been getting a lot of publicity for it — but OU's offense is just as good, ranked fourth in the nation.

    Since there is practically no difference between the two in total offense, the key may be in total defense — and that is really no contest, even though the defenses are not nearly as spectacular as the offenses. Oklahoma's defense is a modest #52 in the country while OSU's doesn't even crack the Top 100.

    I pick Oklahoma.

  • #5 Virginia Tech vs. #21 Clemson at Charlotte, N.C., 7 p.m. (Central) on ESPN: You couldn't tell it from their last five meetings, but this series once belonged to Clemson.

    It's been a sporadic series. They met two or three times a decade — at best — from the turn of the 20th century until the 1980s — and they have only played twice as conference rivals.

    On Saturday, they will play for the ACC title — and it just might be the most entertaining game of the day.

    Clemson hasn't beaten Virginia Tech since 1989 — and I'm not inclined to think that will change.

    Clemson has a narrow edge on offense. The Tigers are 29th in the country while the Hokies are 36th. Tech has a clear edge on defense, ranked 12th while Clemson is 63rd.

    They say defense wins championships so I guess this is Tech's opportunity to prove it. If my other predictions hold up, a win in this game could put Virginia Tech in the national championship game.

    Whether it does or not, though, I'm still picking Virginia Tech by nine points.

  • #24 Southern Miss at #7 Houston, 11 a.m. (Central) on ABC: It's probably a bit of a stretch to see Houston playing in the national championship game — even if the Cougars beat Southern Miss and remain undefeated.

    Chances are that the folks who attend the game — or watch it on TV — will be treated to quite a show. Houston has the nation's top–ranked offense, but Southern Miss' offense is pretty explosive, too. It is ranked 15th in the country.

    Once again, I am reminded of the old adage that defense wins championships because Southern Miss turns the tables on Houston on the defensive side of the ball. Southern Miss has the country's 26th–best defense while Houston's defense is rather pedestrian, ranked 60th in the land.

    The game is for the Conference USA championship — the second time these teams have played for the conference title. Houston won the first time, and I expect Houston, with its potent offense, to win this time, too.

  • New Mexico at #9 Boise State, 5 p.m. (Central) on The Mtn.: There really is no reason to expect much from New Mexico in this game.

    These teams have only played twice before, in 1999 and 2000, and Boise State won both times. This season, Boise State has been much better on both sides of the ball than New Mexico.

    I expect Boise State to absolutely hammer New Mexico.

  • #15 Wisconsin vs. #11 Michigan State at Indianapolis, 7 p.m. (Central) on FOX: Since 2003, the home team has won this game — including the time the two played earlier this season in Lansing, Mich. The Spartans won that game, 37–31.

    This will be the 50th time these teams have played. As the Big Ten title game, it is being played in the neutral site of Indianapolis so home field track records aren't terribly relevant. Wisconsin was the winner the only other time the teams played on a neutral field — in December 1993 when the teams played in the Coca–Cola Classic in Tokyo.

    That offers little insight, though. Certainly, the game played earlier in Michigan provides more — except that the score didn't reflect reality. Both teams have Top 10 defenses. Michigan State's is third in the country, Wisconsin's is seventh.

    Wisconsin's offense is pretty good, too, ranked 12th in the country while MSU's is, by comparison, rather dismal. It is ranked 64th.

    I pick Wisconsin to win the rematch.

  • Iowa State at #16 Kansas State, 11:30 a.m. (Central) on FSN: The history of this series has been that the home team usually wins it.

    But this hasn't been a typical season at Iowa State. It looked like it might be when ISU got off to a 3–4 start with three narrow non–conference wins followed by four straight conference losses. But then — inexplicably — Iowa State got hot and reeled off three straight wins, including a double–overtime thriller against Oklahoma State.

    Now 6–5, the Cyclones appear headed to their seventh bowl since 2000. That's pretty impressive when you consider that Iowa State played in no bowl games from 1979 to 1999.

    Meanwhile, Kansas State is enjoying the kind of recognition it has rarely seen since the dawn of the 21st century. But the 9–2 Wildcats were unable to defeat Oklahoma State when they had their opportunity.

    I got the feeling, as I watched parts of Iowa State's game with Oklahoma last week, that ISU is running out of gas. The numbers say ISU has the better offense and KSU has the better defense.

    Can't win if you don't score, but scoring hasn't been a problem for Iowa State in recent years. Scoring more than K–State, though, has been another matter, and I think ISU will come up just short this time, the way it has tended to do in recent years.

    Kansas State by a touchdown.

  • UNLV at #18 TCU, 1:30 p.m. (Central) on Versus: Unless you are a TCU fan, I can't think of a reason for a college football enthusiast to watch this game.

    UNLV, 1–10, simply doesn't appear capable of beating TCU, 9–2. TCU is light years ahead of UNLV on both offense and defense.

    And there isn't really any hope to be found in the series record. TCU is 8–1 all time against UNLV and enjoys a seven–game winning streak (UNLV's only win came in 1997).

    As TCU departs for the Big 12 next season, the Frogs should be leaving the Mountain West on a winning note. TCU is the clear choice in this one.

  • Texas at #19 Baylor, 2:30 p.m. (Central) on ABC: If you grew up in the old Southwest Conference (as I did) — or even if your memory only includes the Big 12 in the post–SWC era — it is not strange to see these teams play each other.

    They've been playing since 1903, when they first met in the neutral site of San Antonio. Texas won that first encounter, 48–0. In what may have been an indication of the futility of the Bears' efforts in this series, Texas shut out Baylor in their next two meetings as well.

    In fact, the Longhorns either shut out the Bears or held them to less than 10 points in all but one of their first 10 games. Meanwhile, Texas scored at least 11 points (and, often, much more than that) in all but one of those games — the exception was the only one Texas didn't win (a 6–6 tie).

    That has been the history of this series, which will be renewed for the 100th time on Saturday. Baylor usually struggles to score — and win — no matter where they play. The Longhorns have been a little more successful at home than in Waco, where they play this year, but even on the Bears' home field, Texas has won about two–thirds of the time.

    And the Longhorns have won their last six games in Waco. Baylor hasn't beaten Texas there since 1997.

    As I say, it isn't strange for these teams to play each other. Nor is it strange for one of the teams to be ranked. But the ranked team has almost always been Texas, not Baylor.

    The main attraction in this game has to be those times when Baylor has the ball. The Bears' offense, led by Robert Griffin III, and the Longhorns' defense are both in the Top 10.

    Texas has a mediocre offense, but it should be able to handle Baylor's defense, which is one of the worst in the country.

    Frankly, I'd love to see Baylor win. Combined with the Bears' win in Austin last year, that would give Baylor a rare winning streak against Texas. How rare is it? Well, Baylor has had a couple of two–game winning streaks against Texas in my lifetime, one more during my parents' lifetimes and one more during my grandparents' lifetimes.

    The Bears have never won more than two in a row against Texas.

    But I just can't shake the feeling that Baylor will be undone by its defense. I pick Texas to win.
Last week: 15–1

Season: 204–51