The N.C. State comparison

If you're of the opinion that Clemson's athletics department is in a sorry state right now, a look at N.C. State's current predicament shows that it could be a heck of a lot worse.

The N.C. State comparison is interesting because the Wolfpack's administration has poured a bunch of money into its football and basketball programs over the last decade. The level of commitment to the major sports has not been in question.

And yet, the Wolfpack is mired in such abject mediocrity in both sports that athletics director Lee Fowler was forced out amid rampant discontent among the fan base.

N.C. State hasn't had a winning season in football or advanced to the NCAA Tournament in basketball since 2006.

Making matters much worse, N.C. State's two Triangle rivals (North Carolina and Duke) have won three of the last six national titles in basketball.

The jury is still out on Tom O'Brien and Sidney Lowe. If both coaches end up turning things around from here on out, Fowler will end up looking pretty good.

But right now, N.C. State fans are howling for a return on all the money they've spent over the years (Fowler oversaw a $120 million capital campaign that, among other things, totally transformed Carter-Finley Stadium).

Heck, even the Wolfies' academics are out of whack.

The school's faculty athletics rep makes an interesting observation here:

He is concerned, though, about comparisons of N.C. State to some of the other schools in the ACC. He said the conference ranks behind only the Ivy League in terms of academic rigor.

As a highly technical, public institution, Pardue said N.C. State ought to be compared more with schools such as Clemson, Virginia Tech and Georgia Tech. However, N.C. State trails even those schools.

"I'm not saying we're satisfied with the graduation rates we have, because I'm personally not, and I'm confident that the administration is not," Pardue said. "But there are some amazing institutions in our conference.

Looking at the overall plight of N.C. State athletics, it's easy to see how the Wolfpack could view Clemson as what they should be.

Solid academics. Solid in football, including a division title and six straight wins over N.C. State. Solid in basketball, with three straight NCAA Tournament appearances and five wins over the Wolfpack in the last six tries.

Grass sure looks a heck of a lot greener over here from the Wolfies' side of the fence, doesn't it?

No one is saying Clemson fans shouldn't aspire to be better than what they are. After all, they've still gone 18 seasons without putting an ACC title in their trophy case. And three straight first-round ousters in the NCAA Tournament haven't been fun.

But at least Clemson fans can say something N.C. State fans cannot: that they've received some favorable returns on their investment.

Moving right along, the expansion buzz was pretty heavy yesterday. And Rutgers, one of the Big Ten's reported targets, is having some serious internal division on whether the move would be appropriate.

At the same time, some Rutgers professors worry that joining the Big Ten would be one more sign that their school is willing to pursue big-time football at the expense of academics — a topic that has led to tension between faculty and administration in recent years. Rutgers is still recovering from the scandals of two years ago, when internal investigations found the athletic department was operating like a rogue elephant, with little oversight into how it spent money, all in the name of becoming a national football power.

For Rutgers, a member of the smaller Big East Conference, the talks put the state university at a major crossroads, not to mention its 625 athletes in 22 varsity sports. A saber-rattler for conference loyalty earlier this decade, Rutgers is increasingly looking for a bigger field of play.

Bunch of denials yesterday in the wake of the radio report that said Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame and Rutgers had been offered spots in the Big Ten.

Dennis Dodd traveled to Columbia, Mo., and all was quiet.

Dr. Saturday isn't buying this expansion stuff, saying you too can spark the latest rumor on the topic.

The Reese's Orange Bowl. I guess I could dig it. And I could think of a few overweight sportswriters who'd really dig the free chocolate.



David Teel of Newport News gives his early take on the 2010-11 basketball season in the ACC, and he's not high on Clemson.

11. Clemson (21-11, 9-7, first round NCAA): Blindsided by coach Oliver Purnell’s departure to DePaul, the Tigers recovered to make a sage hire in Brad Brownell, formerly of Wright State and UNC Wilmington. Four-year starter and first-team all-ACC forward Trevor Booker exits, making life difficult for a capable perimeter led by Demontez Stitt and Andre Young.

Good story here by Tom Dienhart of Rivals.com on the rising profile of tight ends in the NFL.

College coaches have begun using tight ends in a variety of ways, from having them line up in the slot to putting them in motion to lining them up in the backfield. In recent seasons, the NFL has begun to follow suit.

Gresham (6 feet 5/261 pounds) and former Arizona star Rob Gronkowski (6-6, 264), the second tight end picked in April, are the rare tight ends who have the size to be in-line blockers as well as the athleticism to split out as a pass catcher. Every team wants one of those types.

But the market has expanded to include the athletic, pass-catching tight ends often featured in spread offenses. Think of this newer breed of tight end as a beefed-up wide receiver. The spread offenses that have proliferated in the college game over the past decade have been a haven for the development of this new type of tight end.

NFL teams no longer want clunky, slow-footed, one-dimensional fullbacks taking up a roster spot. More and more NFL teams are going to two-tight end sets because it allows for more versatility and is more difficult to defend than traditional alignments.

Guessing this story would bring a smile to the face of a certain Clemson tight end.


LW