I’m not sure what I was expecting him to say.
The question was about the ceiling for the Arizona Wildcats football program. The interview subject was UA athletic director Greg Byrne. The answer makes perfect sense – yet also makes for a fascinating debate.
“Well, think about it,” Byrne said. “We’ve won 21 national championships in different sports at Arizona. We won the Pac-12 South two years ago early in the rebuild process for Coach Rodriguez. I think we can be nationally successful and competing for conference championships.”
That’s a lot to take in. So let’s break down the key pieces.
First, the notion that Arizona won the South Division “early in the rebuild process” for Rich Rodriguez. That championship came in Rodriguez’s third year. Even though the Wildcats went 4-8 the year before he arrived, it didn’t feel like a rebuild from afar – mainly because the UA went 8-5 in each of Rodriguez’s first two seasons.
Regardless of what preceded it, the Wildcats went 10-4 in Year 3, winning the South with a 7-2 regular-season league record. That finish opened a lot of eyes and raised expectations.
The Wildcats fell well short of those expectations last season, going 3-6 in the Pac-12 and 7-6 overall. Which brings us to the next part of Byrne’s quote and begs the question:
Can Arizona be “nationally successful,” and what exactly does that mean?
(Yes, I probably should have asked Byrne that. But that wouldn’t have been any fun, would it?)
To me, the definition of “nationally successful” is different for Arizona than, say, Alabama. For Arizona, it means consistently flirting with the top 25. For Alabama, it means consistently being in the top five.
As long as Rodriguez remains the coach – and he remains as committed to building a good defense as he is now – Arizona should lurk around the fringes of the top 25 on an annual basis. I’m not sure if that’s precisely what Byrne meant by nationally successful, but I think it would satisfy the masses.
(Am I wrong on that? If so, by all means, let me know.)
Finally, we have Byrne’s contention that Arizona should be “competing for conference championships.”
The Wildcats proved in 2014 that they’re capable of playing with the big boys. The critical question is whether it’s sustainable – and if it isn’t, whether contending every few years is good enough.
Given the depth and parity of the conference – and the fact that USC and UCLA are going to win the majority of the recruiting wars for Southern California talent, no matter how many resources Arizona throws at it – I’m not sure you can ask for much more.
So let’s say 2014 is the ceiling, but it only happens every four years or so. And let’s say 2015 is the floor. And the in-between is something like what it’s been under RichRod: 8-5.
Does that work for Arizona? Does it work for you?
