Bay Area Disagreement? (Hour 1)

Live from the police show, yet not overly ostentatious, studios of CBS Sports Radio, here in beautiful New York City, sitting on top of the 10th floor of 345 Hudson Street. Welcome on in to a Wednesday edition of the Zach Gelb show across all of our great local CBS Sports Radio affiliates, Sirius XM, Channel 158, and that free Odyssey app. 855-212-4CBS. I'm going to jump on in. 855-212-4227. You could always get at me on Instagram, where I'm straight flexing, or the good old cesspool of Twitter, at Zach Gelb.

That's Z-A-C-H-G-E-L-B. We are coming to you live from the Rocket Mortgage Studios. Whether you're looking to purchase a new home or refinance yours, Rocket Mortgage could help you get there.

For home loan solutions that fit your life, well, Rocket can. Coming up today, big guest alert. At 8 20 p.m. Eastern, 5 20 p.m. Pacific, the best defensive player in the NFL, a man that should have won the Super Bowl MVP this past season, Aaron Donald will be stopping by.

So very much looking forward to airing that conversation to you. Hickey, real quickly, because I'm going to tell Aaron that I think he is the best, or that he should have won the Super Bowl MVP. Clearly, he's the best defensive player in the NFL. Going back to that Super Bowl, do you believe Cooper Cup, who won the Super Bowl MVP, was the right call? Because you recall, potentially, we had Isaac Bruce on right after that Super Bowl did come to a close, and Isaac Bruce said that Aaron Donald should have won the Super Bowl MVP.

I disagree with Cooper Cup. I thought it should be Matthew Stafford. Really? Yes.

Played well, led him the big drive, and threw the biggest throw of the game. So you don't even think it should have been Donald? No. Wow. Now that's a take. Some may say that's a hot take, but that's why we call you, by the way, since you are producing this extravaganza for the next four hours, Hot Take Hickey.

Hot Take Hickey. Explain to me, Matthew Stafford, on why you thought he should have won that Super Bowl MVP at SoFi Stadium. It was a phenomenal football game between the Rams and the Bengals. Thought he played well. Had, what, two touchdown passes and led them down for the eventual game-winning touchdown pass with, what, less than two minutes left?

The only thing is... I'll give it to Matthew Stafford. And quarterbacks, fairly or not, always do get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to that award. And I'm not dumping on Matthew Stafford here.

The guy had a very good postseason and had a wonderful year last year with the LA Rams. But on the flip end of that, you could argue that without Aaron Donald being on that field, and that's why I think he should have won the Super Bowl MVP, you can argue that if he doesn't make the play on fourth down, the Rams don't even win the Super Bowl. Because Jamar Chase is wide open down that sideline. And if Joe Burrow had a half-second longer before Aaron Donald throws him to the ground like he's a ragdoll, Jamar Chase has a walk-in touchdown. And unless, if then, Stafford finds a way to go score, and I forget how much time was left, the Rams probably aren't winning that Super Bowl.

That's why I would go Donald. But I'm surprised, and I know that you're a big Matthew Stafford fan, but I am surprised by you that Stafford was the decision when I look at that. Why not just Cooper Cupp? Because he had two touchdowns in that game. So why just go Stafford over Cooper Cupp? Just wondering. Well, because in this day and age, does a quarterback make the receiver or the receiver make the quarterback?

It's always a common thought. I just think in that game, Matthew Stafford played well. Cupp played, had a great game himself except two touchdowns. I just would have given the credit more to Stafford.

That's all. So let me give you the stats here from that game. Eight for 92, two touchdowns for Cupp. Stafford, if you recall, had two interceptions in that game, had three touchdowns, 283 yards, 26 of 40. I would rank it Donald 1 because he made the play, the run stuff on Samaj P. Ryan on third down, then on fourth down, ended the game, put the ring on the finger, all that.

Then I would go Cupp 2 and Stafford 3 if I had to vote, but I don't. So anyway, we will bring that up to Aaron Donald as we will air that interview for you coming up at 8 20 p.m. Eastern, 5 20 p.m. Pacific. I have to start off the show today, and we usually don't start off the show with audio.

We usually give you just directly my opinion in the first 15 minutes. But my opinion today is centered around this Michael Lombardi interview on the Pat McAfee show. Listen up to Michael Lombardi saying that Kyle Shanahan originally wanted Mac Jones and also made a run for Tom Brady. Kyle Shanahan, when he's in Cabo, he's down there, thought he was going to get involved in the Matt Stafford trade. It didn't happen.

Was watching tape. He fell in love with Mac Jones. He wants to trade for Mac Jones. They make the deal to get the three. And then, like in the offer, all these other people who really don't know, because remember what Bill Walsh said, only a few can evaluate the quarterback and only fewer can coach him. And Kyle is one of those few.

And so is his father. He goes back and now he's got resistance within his own building. Remember a year earlier, they Kyle wanted to sign Tom Brady and the resistance factor within the building said, no, no, no, no, we're not doing that. So Kyle gets back once Mac Jones and all of a sudden the Twitter momentum. You can't take Mac Jones there. He's not good enough. You can't hire Al Pacino as as as Michael. You can't do this.

You can't do that. Right. And he gets worn down when it comes to these decisions. Kyle knew. But then he went with Lance. He got talked into Lance. Everybody will deny it. I understand they all deny it.

Certain people know. And now I think this is the residual effect of that. Trey Lance isn't ready to play. He may be great a year from now. He may be great two years from now.

He's not ready to play. And on that plane ride back from Houston, Kyle understood that and said, we got to do something about this. It's kind of crazy when you listen to that audio. Now, there's two takes from it.

Number one, I don't know how you feel on this one, Ryan. Jimmy Garoppolo just got that team to a Super Bowl. And you could fair or not ask the question, how much was it, Jimmy?

How much was it the roster? But Jimmy Garoppolo was starting in the Super Bowl. And for the first three quarters of that Super Bowl, outplayed Patrick Mahomes. And then that offseason was when Tom Brady becomes a free agent. We know that Brady had a desire to go play for the 49ers. I don't know if it ever got close. They have talked about this before, John Lynch and Kyle Shanahan, that they contemplated it.

I think for like 24 or 48 hours, I forget exactly what the quote was. And they elected to go with Jimmy G over Tom Brady, clearly. I didn't have a problem with that in the moment because even though Brady, I think we all know, is a much better quarterback than Jimmy Garoppolo, it's not even close. And for years, when I was, you know, I still am a fan of the Patriots, I would sit back and go, I don't care how good people think Jimmy G is going to be.

I want Tom Brady to be the starting quarterback for the Patriots until he doesn't want to be the starting quarterback anymore. So I was totally on board with the Pats and they moved on from Jimmy G. I thought they could have got more back. To stick with Brady from the 49ers standpoint, though, in a bizarre twist, I understood, even though Brady is by far and away the better quarterback, why they kept Jimmy G because of the contract they gave him. And also, he was one overthrow away if he just threw the ball a little bit shorter from winning that team, the Super Bowl.

I know it's probably easy to do hindsight 2020 and just pile on and dump on the 49ers now. Oh, how did they go for Brady? How did they go for Brady? Personally, though, I did not have a problem with that move at the time.

How about yourself there, Ryan? I'm with you and I hate to do the age thing because now it's stupid to say, oh, you never know how Tom Brady is going to be at, you know, at that time. But it's like at that point, coming off a bad season where we both would agree Tom Brady was better than the parts around him.

It was just they dragged him down. Julie was playing on one leg. They had no wide receivers other than Julie. But like you said, it's still a 43 year old quarterback.

Then you're coming off a Super Bowl season. Like it's easy to say, oh, they should have done it. No brainer. Easy. Now when you see the success he has in Tampa Bay in the moment, you had to make that decision.

I can't say Kyle Shannon and John Lynch in the moment at that point really screwed it up. OK, so glad we got that out of the way. Now let's get into the bigger part of the conversation. I I don't like Mike Lombardi, to be clear. I once did an interview with him when I was doing a low A.M. radio show on 920 the Jersey, which was like a thousand watt radio station. And he called in for an interview. And I get it right. Sometimes I'll admit I do long interviews, you know, 15, 20 minutes.

A lot of program directors don't like that. I was seven minutes into my conversation with Mike Lombardi and he goes, man, Jack, I've never done an interview this long. You're wearing me out. I got to go, man. Bye bye. And he hung up. And I only had one question.

That was the whole irony about that, too. I only had one question left for Mike Lombardi. And ever since I've never put him back on my radio program, he probably doesn't give a rat's ass about me. He probably doesn't even remember the conversation. But I said, if you're not going to. If you're just going to bail on an interview like that and it would be one day, it was like 20 minutes, it was seven minutes.

So I just said to myself, I'm never going to put him on the air again. So me saying I actually believe Mike Lombardi is telling the truth isn't just to add fuel to the fire and add to the drama and now have a segment here. I believe Mike Lombardi is telling the truth that originally Kyle Shanahan wanted Mac Jones, because if you go back to the day we found out, I forget who's pro day it was. Maybe it was Zach Wilson who was having his pro day at BYU and all these trades were going down. I remember watching NFL Network, there was some pro day and the next thing you know, we find that all these trades were happening in the draft. And shortly after that trade did go down, if you recall, it was Chris Sims, who Chris Sims and Kyle Shanahan, they're very close.

They have some bizarre matching tattoos or something like that, that they got done together. And Chris Sims was the first one to suggest that Kyle Shanahan made this move to go get Mac Jones. So if Lombardi is telling you that that was the case and then other people got in his ear, I think it's very believable.

How about yourself, Hot Take? Are you buying what Lombardi is saying here that originally Shanahan preferred Mac Jones, fell in love with Mac Jones, wanted Mac Jones, and then he was talked into going with Trey Lantz, who's now the quarterback? Not at all. You don't believe it for a second.

No, not at all. Because part of the reasoning Mike Lombardi referenced there was the Twitter outrage. I remember when Chris Sims put it out there, there was a lot of pushback and saying, well, why would you draft Mac Jones? You know, you have Jimmy G right there.

There's a lot of similarities, comparisons, and a lot of blowback to that report. The 49ers had their eye on Mac Jones. I don't believe for a second.

Kyle Shanahan would sit there and cave to public pressure and say, I really want Mac Jones, but everyone on Twitter, all the fans, all the newspapers saying we can't draft Mac Jones, so let's go Trey Lantz. No, but it's also people in the organization, is what Lombardi is saying. He is, well, that was part of it, yes.

He's a man of conviction. Let me be clear here real quickly. I don't see him change his mind.

Let me be clear here real quickly. I don't think they didn't draft Mac Jones because people on Twitter and the radio and TV were like, how could you draft Mac Jones? You make that move to go draft Mac Jones?

What the bleep are you doing? I think people in that building help change his opinion or help him say, okay, I'll go with Trey over Mac. And here's the part that I wonder, who did John Lynch want? Because let's just say, and I remember at the time, John Lynch even said, if it's close or if there needs to be a tiebreaker, we'll go with Kyle or something like that. But I just wonder if John Lynch was right away when they made that move, because I've always operated on the belief when they made that trade, they had to know who they were taking or who they preferred in that moment.

You don't risk that much draft capital and not have an idea of who you're taking. And I know Shannon and Lynch have talked about once they made that move, they didn't have to be a secret about it and they got in more homework and then they love Trey Lance, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And Shannon even admitted a few weeks ago on some podcasts, a very much podcast it was, that the decision was between Mac Jones and Trey Lance. So I do think whether it was Kyle in a skeptical way or just coming around to what everyone else was seeing, I do think the other people in that building convinced Kyle to give the thumbs up on Trey Lance.

And the reason why I asked, what did John Lynch want? And if let's say John Lynch was, and I'm just throwing this out there, spitballing, if John Lynch was a Trey Lance guy from the start, and he was one of the people that had to convince Kyle Shanahan, let's just say, then this could turn ugly this season. Because if Trey Lance struggles early on, you're going to have a coach who was skeptical, potentially if this theory is true, on drafting Trey Lance.

And he knows the guy in the locker room right now as his backup in Jimmy G has won a whole lot of games from him. And if your coach is not all in on this young quarterback, then maybe you have a point in the season where Shanahan is saying, John, we should go back to Jimmy G if this gets dreadful. And maybe John Lynch is saying, no, we made this move, we need to stick with our youngster, which would be the right thing to do.

I don't think, to be clear, that they should pull Trey Lance whatsoever this year unless he gets hurt. And you could have your coach and your GM, if this Lombardi report is true, clashing, because Shanahan may be focused on winning the most amount of games possible and doubting Trey Lance. And you could have John Lynch saying, no, we made this move.

We were, whether you agree with it or not at the time, we got everyone's approval on it. So now we have to stick with the youngster. I'm just fascinated to see a lot of moving parts here, Ryan. I'm fascinated to see how this plays out this year, especially if you have a scenario where Trey Lance struggles, and now it's questionable how all in Kyle Shanahan was on Trey Lance. If you are, if Mike Lombardi is correct, and let's say there was initial love with your infatuation with Mack Jones and Kyle Shanahan, he was convinced eventually Trey Lance is our guy I'm in.

I think at the end of the day, Kyle Shannon is a conviction guy where he is all in and whatever guy is there. So if you have Trey Lance, I think he's all in on Trey Lance. I don't think he's going to be sitting there wishing he had Mack Jones and sitting there in week three saying, oh man, you know, this guy just can't, can't play.

He stinks. You know, if only I had what I wanted and he's going to go back to Jimmy G because either way, whether it's Mack Jones or Trey Lance, they were done. He was done with Jimmy G. He saw an upgrade and wants to make a move.

And they got to find the way to make this work is the bottom line. Regardless if he's on board or not, as much as people praise John Lynch and Kyle Shanahan, if Trey Lance flops, and I know the York family loves them, these guys are going to be out of a job because they made a big move that some could deem was unnecessary, or you could say it was necessary because Jimmy G can't win it all. And then if you trade up all that capital and you, let's be real, trade for a guy that's an unknown when Justin Fields was available, Mack Jones was the Heisman trophy finalist, then that move could end up ending your tenure, which people don't think about right now, but it could potentially end their tenure if Trey Lance doesn't work. Cause you know this when you miss on a quarterback in the first round, especially in the top five, top 10 picks of the draft, not everyone could be Arizona where they go draft Kyler Murray. And it saves that ship from sinking after Josh Rosen. Usually when you miss on a quarterback in the first five, 10 picks, that sets your organization back a while. So all I'm saying is, I just wonder how all in Shanahan was, and if he wasn't a hundred percent all in, naturally part of him this season, if Trey Lance does not perform well, could say, it was the reason why I wanted to go with Mack.

There was a reason why I wanted to go with that other quarterback instead of Trey Lance. And I just wonder how that dynamic plays out between John Lynch and Kyle Shanahan. This is Zach Gelb show on CBS Sports Radio. We'll take a time out when we come on back. Pressure or no pressure, hot take Hickey has compiled the list of some college football coaches this year.

We'll see who's going to be feeling the pressure this year, or if I have no pressure on those coaches entering this upcoming season. You're listening to the Zach Gelb show. It is the Zach Gelb show on CBS Sports Radio. College football is back.

Hickey, I don't know where you stand on this. Last weekend, do you consider college football back for week zero? Cause I was at a sports book.

I was in Atlantic city. I was watching some of the games on, but it didn't really feel like college football was back. And now as we get her on Wednesday, you got some games clearly all throughout the week. I'm really excited for Saturday when you have your first full slate of the year. And now I consider week one, not week zero week one for the start of the college football season. Oh, of course. And yesterday or last week is the perfect appetizer. Nice little sprinkling, you know, get you hyped up for sure. But this is, you know, this is the full buffet now.

Week one, let's go. I don't know if appetizer, I get your point is right, but when I think of appetizer, what's the best appetizer to you in your opinion? I know what mine is, but what's yours? Best appetizer. Oh, the fact that you don't have an answer ready to go is just embarrassing. Of course not.

I don't know. Pigs in the blanket. Yeah, I'm not a pigs in the blanket.

More for you. That is true. That's like the only time I'll accept the crappy answer like that. But pigs in the blanket are the great unifier in this country. I could take two people on the opposite end of the political spectrum.

I could take two people that just absolutely hate one another. You put a pig in the blanket and a bunch of pig in the blankets in front of people. It brings everyone together and everyone's happy over a good pig in the blanket.

So that's why I don't like to say that week zero, even though you're right in your analogy is the appetizer, cause I think appetizer pigs in the blanket and that could be better. Like I'm going to a wedding this weekend. The cocktail hour I expect is going to be better than the main course. And I've already checked with my buddy that they have pigs in the blanket at this wedding and I was given the two thumbs up.

So I'm very excited for the cocktail hour. And that's why I just don't like the pigs in the blanket being talked about as a week zero, but that's like a food personal problem. How do you know?

It's something more like a you problem than a problem. Don't bury the lead here. If I put out a poll, do you like pigs in the blanket on Twitter? Do you like a pig in the blanket? 95% of the people would say yes. Sure.

I'm sure they would. Why are, why do you not like a pig in the blanket? Smell that it's just a hot dog. Like it's not that big of a deal. You know like hot dogs?

They're okay. I'm a burger guy. Like once in a while I'll have a dog.

Like actually not, not even like once in a blue moon. I'll maybe have one or two a year. Max. Geez.

Gonna be really in the mood for it. And yeah. I love you, but I hate your food opinions. Sorry. You may have some of the worst food opinions. I don't know about that.

No, you do. You have some of the worst food opinions I've ever heard. But anyway, let's get to a little pressure or no pressure right now. Can I get some college football music? All right.

So no food opinions. So I'm not on the hot seat, but maybe some coaches will be on the hot seat. Let's start with Dabo Sweeney. Is there any pressure on Dabo this year?

So you could define pressure in many different ways. You're going to lose your job. You're going to keep your job depending on your success or failures this year. As long as Dabo Sweeney wants to be the head coach at Clemson, he's going to be allowed to be the head coach at Clemson.

But in a different way of defining pressure, I do think there's a lot of attention. I think a lot of people are curious and are doubting Dabo for the first time in a long time on what they're going to do this year. Cause maybe you had Klubnick get into the mix. DJ Wengle LA did not play well last year. The offensive line was horrible last year. There was no creativity on offense and you've had a lot of success. Not only did you go toe to toe with Nick Saban, you showed him who was boss a few times. You guys at Clemson have won a lot. Now, when you're looked at as a top three, top four program, even some could say top two program in college football, and you just had a disappointing season and a bad ACC, no disrespect to the Pitt Panthers. You have to go find a way to win that conference this year and get back to the college football playoff and make DJ look like a competent quarterback. Like he looked up against Notre Dame during that COVID season.

And if it doesn't work, all eyes are going to be on your backup quarterback who is highly touted. So I think there's pressure on Dabo Sweeney. How about pressure on the reigning big 10 champion, Michigan Wolverine, Ted coach, Jim Harbaugh. So you Penn Staters.

Oh geez. What do you mean you Penn State? Who else are you talking about?

No, I got a text here and it just ruined my night. From Penn State guy? No, no, no. Okay.

A dear friend, Steve Sparky Pfeiffer. Okay. Yeah. And Sparky said pass on pigs in a blanket. Sparky knows.

Well, you and Steve are both two emaciated fellas, so I don't really trust your opinion. Look at these guns. You see this?

You can see through the glass. You see these biceps right there? This is not made on pigs in the blanket. All right. You've been working out recently. I have.

Yes, I have. No, no. Your muscles have never been. Your arms have never been that jacked. I've never had to lift off my shirt before. Flex for the cameras again. When you were in this studio doing the pushups.

That's right. And you had 40 something pushups. 41. You ripped off. Who's counting?

You ripped off your shirt and you look good. Greg Caserta, I think, is doing updates. What did he say? Hubba hubba. Yeah, Greg Caserta was going all hubba hubba when talking about hot take Hickey. That's right. Even then, though, when you ripped off your shirt, you didn't look as jacked as you do now.

Like, Caserta, real quickly. Yeah, what's up? You thought Hickey's body looked good when he ripped off his shirt in the studio. I did. Okay. Look. Flex for the cameras one more time. Look at this GC. Look at those biceps.

You didn't have that before. Biceps. I think he's on some steroids. Somebody's been hitting the machines this summer, huh?

Well, when his girlfriend's been out of town for weeks, I guess he had to go to the gym. Body not sponsored by pigs in the blanket. Your glasses are hideous, but otherwise you look good.

Blue lights protecting my eyes. He may be the only decent looking producer here on CBS Sports Radio. He's the only one that's put together. Yeah, the arms are getting big, bud.

That's right. You gotta let people know. People want to look at me, think I'm small. Just in case, I gotta get in a little tussle. If someone's showing up at Penn State or the Colts, put them in their place.

Yeah, you're already talking about Penn State. How do you hear him right now? I turn it up. Super sonic hearing. His headphones are on the table and he's talking to you.

I go, what wireless headphones do you have? I could sense it through the glass. Tremendous lip reader. We will get to a great concert update in just a second, but real quickly. Oh, now my mom just texted me.

She said, tell Hickey he's got to work on his form again because she thought you got a little bit sloppy in the final ten pushups. Debatable. Anyway, pigs in the blanket. Do you like pigs in the blanket? Love them, yeah.

Thank you. You're a normal person. Hickey hates them. Hickey hates them. Do you like hot dogs?

Like once in a blue moon, like two dogs a year. It's not my thing. I'm a burger guy. When you go to a wedding, isn't the best part the pigs in the blanket at the cocktail hour?

It's up there. Crab cakes. Crab cakes are always good.

Anything that comes around with a napkin that isn't messy and doesn't require any sort of dipping is a good empanada. There you go. Now we're talking. Yeah, yeah. The first time I ever made a speech as a food. No, I'm not taking everything. Yeah, that's a good point. I'm not paying for this.

Zach's scouting where the servers are coming in and out of the fresh food. Unless it has avocado because I'm allergic or mushrooms. Those are the only things I won't do. I won't puke in.

I won't feel well during the whole wedding. There's always a mushroom hors d'oeuvre, so you always know to stay away from that. And I go politely, you know, me being a boisterous guy, big guy.

I go, oh, by the way, does that have any mushrooms in it? Oh no. Okay. I'm good then. And they, and they go back and they're talking smack about you in the back. Like the big guys, high maintenance, stay away from them. All right.

Anyway, continue your hickey. Give me the, uh, the coaches here. Jim Harbaugh. You Penn Staters, by the way, hate Jim Harbaugh.

Yeah. Hackenberg last night saying there's pressure on him. You're saying there's pressure on him. The guy just won the big 10 and got to the college football playoff. I know people want to see if he could repeat that, but if they lose to Ohio state this year, then the pressure really doesn't happen until next year because he just had the success. So I'm going to say no pressure on Jim Harbaugh this year. Texas head coach, Steve Sarkeesian. No pressure.

Even though a lot of people would say pressure, pressure, pressure. He's at Texas. You got to bring Texas back. It's because even if this year doesn't go the way that people think it's going to go or Quinn Ewers doesn't play well, he has the safety insurance of arch Manning.

And then that's when the real pressure starts. Speaking of Penn state, how about their head coach, James Franklin? Yeah. Most overrated coach in the country. I know he just got the big long-term contract extension. You're not even talking positively about Penn state football. I say there's pressure because then if he doesn't exceed expectations this year or take Penn state fans or Penn state fans, Penn state fans hope to one day go, it becomes, all right, you're good, but you're not great. What are you going to become?

What are you going to elevate to? And Franklin stuck on that very good category. And it hasn't shown me yet that he could be great. The class of the big 10 recently has been Ohio state. How much pressure is on Ryan day?

A lot of pressure pressure to win it all. They've been in the, in the national championship game, you have a top two quarterback in the country. Some would say the best, depending on where you place Bryce Young up against CJ Stroud, your wide receivers are always ridiculous. I don't care who you lost. You made some changes on the defensive side of the ball. You are on the Alabama level for this season.

You got to go win it all. So there's pressure on Ryan day. Lincoln Riley and his first year with the Trojans. First year coach in a new spot. And I know Lincoln Riley just had a lot of success at Oklahoma. I usually say no pressure, but USC fans, they don't have a lot of patience to begin with. You bring in that tremendous wide receiver from pit. You have Caleb Williams. Now you have one of the better coaches, a top seven coach in the country. Yeah. There's pressure right away.

And especially when you're playing a pack 12, a lot of people don't love. Is there any pressure on chip Kelly? I know he did better than what people thought. And I'm surprised he's not in Oregon once again, and he's staying at UCLA.

I'm at a point. I just don't care what chip Kelly does anymore. This guy was great at Oregon goes to the NFL was an absolute disaster with the Eagles in the 49ers. And now he's at UCLA and I'm just like, eh, whatever. I never think he's going to make UCLA a dominant team. And that's why I just don't really care.

And I have no expectations for him. How about his brother, Brian Kelly? They kind of look alike kind of just a disclaimer. They're not actually related.

That was crappy hickey sarcasm right there. Yeah. There's a lot of pressure because a lot of people are doubting Brian Kelly, who is a really good coach at LSU. And I think people want to see him fail. So he has to shut some of those people up a little bit this year. Two more. How about are the pirate Mike Leach, who we saw at the draft talking shop, poor guy talking shop right in the casino.

No pressure. And I know people are looking forward to his quarterback in Mississippi State. They always have with Mike Leach, you know, good offenses. But I just in the SEC, I don't really know what to expect other than like seven or eight wins for that program.

And finally, things are rarely smooth at Rocky Top. How about Josh Heiple? Any pressure on him? That's another job where the fan base is impatient and the fan base sometimes thinks they know what they want, but then they don't actually know what's best for them. I'll say no pressure because he had a good year.

Number one, him and the AD had a great connection and relationship back at UCF when they were together. And I like Henson Hooker, so I think they'll be fine not to make the ship sink this year. And I don't put any pressure on Josh Heiple in your number two. So that's a little pressure, no pressure on the Zach Gilp show on CBS Sports Radio. Take a time out, a new report on maybe some potential playoff expansion and when that could be coming. But first up with the latest CBS Sports Radio update. Great to see him back in our CBS Sports Radio Studios.

Always great when he fills in. I was driving around New Jersey one day, flipped on my old station, and then I hear Greg Caserta broadcasting Trenton Thunder Games. This dude, I can't wait until like five, six years from now and maybe hopefully sooner when we get Caserta doing Major League Baseball games and just going nuts announcing some of the local Major League Baseball teams. Three years or less. Okay. Let's go three or less. So let me just rewind. It's not like it's live radio or anything.

In what year I can't wait to hear Greg Caserta be the voice of like the Texas Rangers. Chris, pro sandwich artist, amateur spokesperson, rolling. New Subway delivery. Order only on the Subway app and get special deals. Like $0 delivery fee. Chris, are you ordering on the Subway app right now?

Uh, maybe. Ooh, could I get in on that? Eat fresh refresh from the top, please. Freshly prepared for your order.

Limited time and participating shops, terms, taxes, and other fees still apply. Cut. You're listening to the Zach Gelb show.

And you can think of Riley Auto Parts where your car care needs get guaranteed low prices and excellent customer service from the professional parts people at O'Reilly Auto Parts. How about this tweet from Brett McMurphy? The college football playoff board of managers Friday could adopt a 12 team playoff for the final two years of current playoff contract in 2024 and 2025. Sources tell Brett McMurphy at Action Network HQ this is the proposed 12 team format recommended last year by the college football playoff working group first reported by Ross Dellinger.

Now, Hickey, here's the problem I have with this. Last year, all these talks or this year, all the talks crumbled because that alliance that was always flaky and you knew that that alliance wasn't really going to be kept intact because this is, in a weird way, survival of the fittest in college football. The ACC could say, oh yeah, we're with that conference and that conference. But ultimately, if one of your schools want to go leave to go to another conference, whether it's in the ACC, the Big 12, the Pac 12, whatever, they're going to get up and go. Like, if you're going to have USC and UCLA want to go to the Big 10, they're clearly going to go to Big 10, as we've seen. If Oklahoma and Texas wanted to leave the Big 12 to go to the SEC, that was inevitable. So when we saw the Texas, Oklahoma moves happen, it's almost as if the rest of, let's just say the ACC, the Big 12, the Pac 12, they panicked. And even to the Big 10, to some standpoint, because the SEC was getting stronger and it's already preeminent conference, and they just got two mega brands, and it was in theory, let's just join forces for now so we could try to weaken the SEC on any voting or just put off any further discussions. But the problem in doing that is inevitably there was going to be more change and inevitably bigger brands or big brands were going to be on the move. And eventually there's just going to be a time where this gets, what, truncated to maybe three super conferences or two super conferences, or maybe just one big super conference together. So it didn't really make sense why they elected to wait. And now, basically a year later or a season later, it's up, here comes the College Football Board of Managers Friday that could adopt a 12-team playoff for the final two years of the current playoff contract in 2024-2025.

I think it makes a lot of sense because, look, you see now with these switches, right? First, last year's Oklahoma and Texas moving from the Big 12 to the SEC, and that kind of spurred or kind of threw talks off the rails. Well, now there's a report that with the Big 12 negotiating with ESPN, that with the four teams coming next year, that they can get a new deal. That could expedite Oklahoma and Texas' leave from the Big 12 and entrance into the SEC. Also, USA, UCLA are going to the Big 10 starting 2024. So if you're right now a team in any other conference, you're looking at arguably all four spots if the current format remains coming from either the Big 10 or the SEC.

All four, right? Like there's a real possibility two conferences could eat up all four of those spots if nothing changes. The only team that would probably have a leg to stand on, maybe two, would be the would be Clemson still inside the ACC to get into the four still, and then if Notre Dame is undefeated, then that goes into a different topic of conversation they would probably get in. But if you're the Big 12, if you're the Pac-12, if you're the ACC, if Clemson can't get back to that elite, elite, elite level, you're on the outside looking in. So you're like, oh, well, how do we get in the playoff? And the brand of Miami or Florida State, if they ever get things going and if they were undefeated or one loss, they would still have a seat at the table. Whole hell of a lot easier though, as you know, to get in there with 12, then it's with four, and you get paid, the conferences get money, and now with, you know, that's part of being the deal of moving, how do you incentivize schools to stay?

Oh, look, we'll get three teams in and we'll get a payoff from the cultural playoffs. It's just amazing to me because I personally don't think they should expand. And I originally did, then two years ago, I said they shouldn't expand, just keep it at four. And then I've said, and I've said this for a few years, if they are going to expand, I would only like to see it go to eight because I have even waved that white flag where expansion I know is inevitable. And I would just go to eight.

And at the time, now this needs to be changed a little bit with all the movement. But at the time I was saying your five power, five conference winners get in, then you have a group of five spots. So like Cincinnati of a year ago, and then you have two wildcard teams for the remaining two best teams that are non-conference champions. Going to 12 though, that's a lot of teams.

And I just fear, and I know it all comes down to money. When you go to 12, like at four, we struggle to find good games. Are we going to get good games just because we're adding more teams? That to me is the tough part where you go to 12, it just seems like there's too many and there's going to be some three lost teams potentially that get into a 12 team playoff. And I don't need to see a three lost team in a 12 team playoff. Well, if the goal is to get more competitive games right away, the answer is no, because you're right. The semifinal is not competitive right now with four teams. But the incentive is if you can have more teams get into the playoff and more teams have access, you can promote that in part of recruiting.

Come here, we have a chance to make the playoff. And all of a sudden now you could start to try to take away recruits going to Alabama and Georgia and Ohio State and get them to, let's say, second tier programs to kind of spread the talent out to create more parity in the sport that desperately right now needs it. It's just amazing how we are still here. And now I don't want to say that we got an answer because when this gets officially announced, I'll say, OK, and then the contract's away and we'll see what it turns out to be. But it's amazing how long, and it kind of fits into college football and NCAA athletics, how outdated it is and how antiquated some may say, or how it just takes forever to make simple decisions. It's wild to me how we're still discussing.

I felt like we've been discussing this thing for what, five, six years expansion? And we still sit here and now we think we know what's going to happen the final two years of this deal. And I guess if McMurphy's putting it out there, and once again, the board of managers Fridays could, he says could adopt a 12-team playoff for the final two years. I don't want to say I'll believe it when I see it, because I have a feeling if he's going to put this out there, it's going to happen. But we still don't know what the long-term future of college athletics, but more, I don't want to say more importantly, but for this discussion, what the future of the playoff is going to look like.

And it's amazing how we're still on this conversation. And the tricky part of that report is in order for the playoff format to change before the contract expires after the 2025 season has to be unanimous. All 10 conference commissioners and Notre Dame have to all simultaneously 11 say this is our format. Look, as you know, college football is very divided.

I hope it gets done. Is it the Pac-12 that would say no? Because why wouldn't the Big 12 say yes to this? The Big 12, they have four new schools that are entering, and I know that they're losing Texas and Oklahoma. This opens up a chance for one of their schools, outside chance of two to get in. On four, it's going to be tough to get in just because the quality of the conference is going to go down a little bit when you lose a school like Oklahoma. And no school outside of Oklahoma has gotten in from the Big 12.

And if that meal ticket is out, you want more access. So I don't think the Big 12 would say no? I would agree. The ACC, it's pretty much Clemson or bus now. So I would say that the ACC wouldn't say no either. Agree, you got more teams in. Because that will at least get a school maybe two in. We know the SEC and the Big 10 will be like, yeah, thumbs up because then your third and fourth place teams could probably get in.

Absolutely. The Pac-12 is the one that's the wildcard to me. Now there's a bunch of other conferences too. I don't know how they're going to approach this, but the Pac-12 is the wildcard to me because they're losing USC, they're losing UCLA, and maybe more schools. I don't even know if the Pac-12 is going to be in existence by the time we get to this expansion of the college football playoff. Potentially not, but one of the ways you keep the conference afloat is by getting teams in there and giving Oregon a chance. If you say no, and it's still four teams in Oregon sitting there saying, we basically have no chance to get in the playoff, why do you want to stay? I think that's the only way to keep the conference afloat and have a chance of surviving is by saying yes. And then if the Pac-12 does say no, and let's say you have a really good Oregon team, but you have a bunch of other one-loss teams in there, maybe they go stick it to Oregon because the Pac-12 prevented this from going to 12 teams. And you know Oregon, the first chance they get will be right at the door.

Yeah, and as they should. Oregon should probably go to the Big 10. That's what makes the most sense to me once USC and UCLA go to the Big 10. But geography in college sports, it's long dead, and trying to make sense of this is basically impossible. So the athletic put out some numbers in a simulation with NFL teams for this upcoming season. We'll give you those numbers on the other side. We'll tell you if it's going to be higher or lower than what the athletic is currently predicting. Zach Kelp's show, CBS Sports Radio.