A wide array of questions in this segment, including one on the NCAA, of course.

Q: One Pete said:
Wolf-
Do you think that coaches like Pete Carroll who schmooze and endear themselves to the local media essentially buy themselves a hall pass from criticism, investigations, etc especially when all is well in the program. On the contrast someone like Chip Kelly whose terse, chapped ass style of dealing with the media and the he doesn’t really whore himself to them (twitter, blogs, book signings) doesn’t do him any favors. Living in Oregon I get the sense that there are some media members here who are chomping at the bit for a chance to bury Kelly should the opportunity present itself just because he doesn’t massage their ego the way, say a Pete Carroll would. Does this go on in media circles? Thanks.

A: I have mixed feelings about your question. I definitely think coaches like Pete Carroll usually get better coverage because they cooperate with the media. It makes sense for all coaches. On the other hand, I can’t really remember the Oregon media attacking Chip Kelly. My experience over the years is that it’s tougher for media located in smaller college towns to really criticize a (popular) coach no matter how surly that coach might be with the media. So I’d like to see some examples where the Oregon media went after Chip Kelly. But coaches do generally get better coverage when they cooperate.

Q: sureshot said:
The NCAA decision on the OSU5 is pretty curious. Essentially, the NCAA said that bowl games are sacred and that to avoid missing out on the experience, suspensions can/will be waved until the following season: “NCAA championship competition recognizes the unique opportunity these events provide at the end of a season, and they are evaluated differently from a withholding perspective.”

With that in mind, wouldn’t it have been reasonable to assume that, had Reggie Bush been caught prior to the 2005 Orange Bowl (even though there’s no proof that he began accepting money at this time) he would have been suspended for a period of games beginning in the following season? By that token, USC should not have been stripped of any postseason games as part of their penalty since, by their rules, he wouldn’t have been ineligible for the Orange Bowl in the first place.

It’s also curious that the NCAA decided to ignore the “unique opportunity” a bowl game would have given the current roster since none of them were guilty of committing infractions – but that’s a story for another day.

A: I think your question sums up why the NCAA’s decision-making process is so inconsistent. It’s also interesting to see the new director of enforcement is going on a media tour with a Los Angeles stop scheduled in February. It seems the NCAA realizes its image is taking a beating lately and wants to do something about it. Now the question is whether this will extend to the appeal decision for USC?

Q: Zovoz said:
Scott,

What do you predict, both draft and NFL, for those leaving the program? And in particular, for seniors that could have been starters elsewhere; guys like Mitch Mustain and C.J. Gable? Will they get a reasonable chance at a pro career?

A: I think Mitch Mustain and C.J. Gable’s workouts will determine their status. They could both be late-round picks if they enjoy good workouts. Tyron Smith looks like a first-round pick and Jurrell Casey will probably work his way into the first round after the combine. Jordan Cameron looks mid-to-late round. Kris O’Dowd looks like a mid-round pick.