Happy Friday.

Follow me on Twitter. Or check out my Facebook page. You can do old-school email at TedMillerESPN@gmail.com.

To the questions!

Oscar writes: Do you think Sam Darnold can win the Heisman if he has a season like Lamar Jackson but with the same record of 9-4? Even if he does or doesn’t win the Heisman, do you think he sticks around one more year?

Ted Miller: The last part of your question -- does Darnold stick around for his junior year in 2018 -- is a bit too speculative at this point. If he has a huge season and is generating early first-round NFL draft buzz, he'd have to take the option of leaving seriously.

Darnold already is a Mr. Obvious on preseason Heisman short lists. USC quarterbacks get a lot of attention almost without fail, and Darnold might be the most physically talented Trojans QB since Mark Sanchez. (However you break down Sanchez's NFL career, he was a fantastic talent. Tyrone Willingham once told me his high school film was the best he'd seen.)

While a few losses could derail things, USC quarterback Sam Darnold has to be on everyone's preseason Heisman list. Harry How/Getty Images

Lamar Jackson's season was an odd one. Over the first half, he was by far the most impressive player in the nation. His seeming late fade during a three-game losing streak to end the season was unusual, though a Heisman winner crashing and burning in a bowl game -- as Jackson did against LSU -- is not terribly rare.

It's not unfair to say that if the award were presented after the national title game, Clemson QB Deshaun Watson would have won.

It's difficult to believe that Darnold could win the 2017 Heisman with four defeats, as expectations for USC will be higher than they were for Louisville this year. More often than not, the Heisman goes to the best player on the best team, or at least the best player on a top-10 team. If USC's season is deemed disappointing, and three or four losses after starting out in the top five would be a notable crash and burn, it's unlikely that Darnold would win the Heisman, even with great numbers.

My expectation is USC won't disappoint, and for that reason I'd rate Darnold the most likely player in 2017 to be invited to the Heisman ceremony next December.

Cougar Brian writes: Well, the National LOI day has come and gone, and the same schools are on top of the recruiting rankings that are normally there. For those of us that are not on top of the top-rated classes, it seems that oftentimes disappointment sets in every year during this time. And oftentimes, schools with highly rated classes, with all this talent, fail to see that talent materialize on the field come fall, while others make more with less every year. What do you personally put more weight in: How many stars after a recruit's name and the school they end up at, or the fit within a university, the culture of the university and the fit within a scheme?

Ted Miller: Funny you should ask this, Brian -- I wrote about notorious recruiting underachievers this week.

Recruiting has become a second season in college football. It represents an opportunity to "win" again, perhaps even erasing a disappointing season, and it offers up another chance to trash talk a rival. Fans of elite Power 5 teams tend to love following recruiting.

For fans of teams that rarely reach the top 25 in the national recruiting rankings, it represents one of three things: 1. Something to completely ignore; 2. Something to mock; 3. Something to get stressed about.

As you are a Washington State fan, Brian, my guess is you are a mix of all three, though never without at least a smidgeon of wit about the whole mess, however your mind might be vacillating between the above three options at any given time.

As for what I'd put more value in if I had a rooting interest, I'd prefer my team to sign all the 5-star guys and win the national title every other year -- it's not like it's more fun to bounce back from disappointment after being trolled for a year than it is to win everything.

There is no question that great recruiting correlates to success on the field. Teams with top-25 classes are more likely to finish in the top 25, just as teams with top-10 classes are more likely to finish in the top 10. Here's some more perspective on that.

That said, some coaching staffs do a better job of getting value out of their recruiting that might not show up on signing day. They are capable of projecting development and recognizing specific fit. There's also a lot to be said for a prospect's character and ability to be coached.

It's clear that Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and Florida State have accumulated momentum in attracting and developing talent. It's also clear that some programs outperform their recruiting rankings, though the two best examples of that in recent history -- Michigan State and Oregon -- both faltered this season.

Brian, I'm sure you recall the halcyon days when the Cougars were riding a run of top-10 finishes (2001-03) and then-coach Bill Doba tried to advance Cougar recruiting and go after players with a higher star rating. Things didn't go well, though it must be noted that a lot was going on in Doba's life then, as his wife was terminally ill.

In the end, programs that aren't situated in fertile recruiting territory rarely are going to finish highly in recruiting rankings. So you'd best content yourself with hoping your coaching staff has a keen eye for proverbial diamonds in the rough and the coaching chops to overcome a deficit of raw talent.

Tom writes: Cal seems like they are in a lot of trouble. They hired Justin Wilcox very late in the process, which seems to have caused a ripple effect not allowing him to recruit much if at all. Now starting left tackle Aaron Cochran has announced he is transferring. How far is Cal away in (what is looking like) one of the best divisions in college football?

Ted Miller: Cal has plenty of issues. The biggest are revenue and debt and how there's more of the second in Berkeley than the first.

But this year's recruiting class is way down the list. And there's plenty to build optimism upon.

While the Bears will be the likely preseason pick to finish last in the Pac-12's North Division, the small-splash hiring of Justin Wilcox has been bolstered significantly by Wilcox's fantastic staff hires.

Tim DeRuyter and Beau Baldwin running the defense and offense? Marques Tuiasosopo coaching QBs? Steve Greatwood leading the O-line? Jerry Azzinaro coaching the D-line?

It might be among the top three or four staffs in the Pac-12 already.

For a first-time head coach to surround himself with that many veteran coaches -- DeRuyter and Baldwin have been head coaches -- is impressive. Moreover, Cal fans have my personal guarantee that with Wilcox, DeRuyter and Azzinaro, the Bears defense will significantly improve this fall.

As for how quickly Cal can again become a factor in the North race, that's a tough one, in large part because there are five other moving pieces in the division, with Washington and Chris Petersen already in the national title hunt, and Oregon hiring a new coach in Willie Taggart.

And there are plenty of notable talent holes, starting with the defense but extending to the uncertain situation behind center.

The measure for Wilcox this season will be how hard his team competes through all four quarters of 12 regular-season games. Then he needs to upgrade the results in recruiting.

So Cal fans should at least expect the Bears to be back in a bowl game by Year 2 or 3, and better than that in Year 4.