The Trifecta: Which program has the best football and basketball combo?

With college football in full swing and college basketball gearing up, the Eye on College Basketball staff decided this week's The Trifecta should discuss a combination of both sports. Which schools have the best combination of coaches in football and basketball? Who could be this year's bust? Which coach is best at developing stars for the pros?

CBS Sports' Gary Parrish, Matt Norlander, and Sam Vecenie have the answers below.

1. It's football season. And basketball season is coming soon. So let's tie the two sports together this week, and start with this question: Which school, right now, has the best combination of football and basketball coaches?

Vecenie: Oh wow, we're getting the big ones done at the top here. While my alma mater Ohio State certainly has an argument, the question did specify "right now." Given the question mark that is the Buckeye basketball team this year and their relative struggles over the previous two years, I'll pass on them and coach Thad Matta despite Urban Meyer's dominance and go with another Big Ten school. Michigan State has things absolutely rolling right now on both ends. The basketball team made the Final Four last year, brought in a stellar recruiting class this year, and has the No. 1 recruiting class currently in 2016. In football, they've been a top-five team over the last two years and could be positioning themselves for a playoff berth even if they lose to Ohio State in Columbus in November. For my money Tom Izzo and Mark Dantonio are both top-10 coaches in their fields, which means there should continue to be some modicum of consistency going forward even in the cyclical nature of collegiate athletics. So yeah, give me Sparty over the Buckeyes, Baylor (Scott Drew and Art Briles), and Arizona (Sean Miller and Rich Rodriguez).

Parrish: Once upon a time the Urban Meyer-Billy Donovan combo at Florida was clearly No. 1, if only because both were in their primes and owners of national championships. But now Meyer, as Vecenie noted, is at Ohio State, and Donovan is in the NBA. So things have really changed in Gainesville, huh? The Meyer-Matta combo at Ohio State is worth considering. And I could make a decent argument for Guz Malzahn-Bruce Pearl at Auburn, Bob Stoops-Lon Kruger at Oklahoma, Rich Rodriguez-Sean Miller at Arizona, Jim Harbaugh-John Beilein at Michigan, Brian Kelly-Mike Brey at Notre Dame, Bobby Petrino-Rick Pitino at Louisivlle and even David Cutcliffe-Mike Krzyzewski at Duke. But I agree with Vecenie. The correct answer is Dantonio-Izzo at Michigan State. Dantonio has won at least 11 games in four of the past five seasons, finished ranked in the top five each of the past two seasons, and his Spartans are ranked second in the AP poll right now. And I don't need to tell anybody reading a college basketball column about Izzo. So, yeah, put me down for Michigan State.

Norlander: Love how Parrish basically rattles off all the realistic candidates. If I don't go Michigan State -- which is my pick, by the way; how could it not be at the moment? -- Duke is the call. K's achievements speak for themselves, but for Cutcliffe to have done what's he done (won coach of the year in college football -- AT DUKE), it's amazing. In terms of pure coaching skill, the best combination of basketball and football minds currently at one school ... it might well be Duke, because K could be the best ever, and plenty in college football believe Cutcliffe would certainly excel at almost any job given his acumen and what he's proven previously at Ole Miss, and now in Durham.

2. Auburn football was ranked sixth in the preseason AP Poll. Then the Tigers struggled with Louisville in the opener, almost lost to Jacksonville State in Week 2, got blown out at LSU this past weekend, and now seem on track to be the biggest disappointment this season. In basketball, if you had to guess, which team is most likely to, like Auburn football, not live up to its preseason expectations?

Norlander: Loving question No. 2, because we always have at least one preseason team that falls, and falls hard. With Auburn football, the perspective on this is: the Tigers were predicted by many to reach the CFP, and short of that, at least be a top-10 team. That seems very unlikely now. So in college hoops a comparable comparison would be a team predicted by at least some to be Final Four-worthy, and almost certainly a team that will win at least 25 games. My pick ... Iowa State. It's Steve Prohm's first year. Georges Niang could be a top-five player in the country, but given the conference ISU is in this season and my suspicion about the Cyclones' frontcourt, I wouldn't be shocked if ISU wound up "only" playing out to a 22-win season and a Sweet 16 appearance. In some ways, ISU did this last season, when it fell to UAB in the NCAAs, but the tournament's a fickle monster.

Vecenie: I also really like this question, and Matt picked out a team that I think is certainly in a bit of danger. Iowa State plays in a tough league, will have to adjust to a slightly new system, and replace a couple of solid pieces. To be different though, I'll take a team whose ceiling is pretty high, but whose floor is lower for me. The Maryland Terrapins could have one of the most talented teams in the country, but there is still an awful lot to integrate there. Rasheed Sulaimon is a new piece coming off of an inauspicious career at Duke. Robert Carter has been there a year, but also hasn't played in a year and overlaps positionally with where Jake Layman is best deployed. Diamond Stone is a terrific interior talent, but he could struggle defending without fouling inside and moving his feet on the perimeter in Year One. Melo Trimble had a bit of a rough summer with the Pan Am team. Also -- and this is more of an intangible thing -- but Dez Wells was a guy they really counted on last year to get shots when the shot clock was winding down. He had a killer instinct. Do these guys have one? They might, we just don't know. Let's also not forget that this team was 11-1 last year in games decided by six points or fewer (in other words, two possessions), which makes them a fairly decent regression candidate in close games. I'm not selling stock in Maryland necessarily, but the Terps do have more of a downside than some of the other top teams in my mind, especially given the depth at the top of the Big Ten.

Parrish: I can envision either of the teams you guys selected falling short of expectations, mostly for the same reasons. With Iowa State, it's because we have no idea how a veteran team will adjust to a new coach not named Fred Hoiberg. With Maryland, it's because the Terrapins did lose their leading scorer from a team that seemed to win all of its close games last season, and what if the bounces in the final minutes of games aren't as favorable this season? Beyond that, go look at Maryland's road schedule in the Big Ten. Brutal. So nothing is guaranteed there. But, in the spirit of diversity, I'll mix it up and go with ... Duke. Yes, I realize Mike Krzyzewski is arguably the best man to ever instruct basketball players at any level, and I know the incoming freshmen are talented. But, man, the Blue Devils just lost so much from last season -- specifically their top four scorers and best four players in Jahlil Okafor, Tyus Jones, Justise Winslow and Quinn Cook. Can you really do that and not miss a beat? Perhaps. And, frankly, I'd never bet against Coach K. But I get the sense this could end up being the season between seasons at Duke. In other words, Duke was great last season and should be great next season -- especially if Harry Giles ultimately enrolls. But it might be hard for Krzyzewski to mold this almost entirely new roster into a legitimate top-five (or even top-10) team, and the top-five is where at least one national magazine has the Blue Devils ranked this preseason.

3. One of the interesting things about Ole Miss football -- besides the fact that the Rebels are coming off a win at Alabama and now rank third in the AP poll -- is that the biggest reason for its success is its unbelievable recruiting class from a few years back that has lived up to expectations, meaning Hugh Freeze has taken elite high school prospects -- like Laquon Treadwell and Robert Nkemdiche -- and developed them into high-major stars who project as future NFL Draft picks. In college basketball, which coach is the best at doing that -- at taking elite talent and consistently developing it so that the prospects become the players they were supposed to become?

Parrish: I think Michigan's John Beilein is probably the best at taking guys who weren't projected as pros out of high school and helping them become lottery picks -- as I pointed out in a column last year. But this isn't about that. This is about the man who enrolls projected pros and then doesn't screw them up, and the obvious answer -- Kentucky's John Calipari -- is the right answer, isn't it? Whether it was Derrick Rose and Tyreke Evans at Memphis, or anybody from John Wall to DeMarcus Cousins to Anthony Davis to Michael Kidd-Gilchrist to Karl-Anthony Towns at Kentucky, Calipari has an exceptional record of smoothly transitioning elite talent from high school to the NBA. Simply put, if you're supposed to be great, there's a good chance Calipari will do nothing to make you less than great in the eyes of NBA scouts, and he'll probably make you better. And that's a huge selling point with recruits, which is among the reasons he's a monster on the recruiting trail.

Norlander: GP, Calipari is the go-to answer. Yes. You know who I would've picked, but can't? Think about a coach who often put guys into the pros, who did it for more than a decade. Won national titles. But now he's made the leap himself. Yep, Billy Donovan. He was an ideal answer to this question until he left for Oklahoma City in the spring. In terms of active coaches, Mike Krzyzewski isn't the prominent answer here, but he's turned his reputation around in this regard since Duke won its third national title, back in 2010. The past six seasons have seen Krzyzewski recruit at arguably his highest level ever, and in doing so, his players have been making it to the NBA in pipeline style.

Vecenie: Yeah, it's Calipari obviously. He's really the only answer here, for reasons Gary noted. But given that I have some space to riff on another, I'll mention that Sean Miller has done a pretty good job of this over the last five years given his standing as a high-level recruiter. Aaron Gordon went higher than expected. Stanley Johnson stayed pretty steady in his stock. Rondae Hollis-Jefferson went in the first round as expected. Plus, he has some solid history of getting guys to overachieve like Nick Johnson, Derrick Williams, Solomon Hill, and T.J. McConnell. Heck, you could even say he helped get Matt Korcheck a guaranteed deal (even if it's in a different sport entirely). That's one heck of a long list in just five years. If he can get Kaleb Tarczewski and Allonzo Trier to the NBA, it would basically be a near-unblemished record of getting high level, elite recruits to the NBA. That's something worth mentioning, even if his track record still doesn't quite match Calipari's.