They were playing for Stewart's job. And although the players didn't know it, Stewart did.

The fact is, he has known since Nov. 14 - the day after the Mountaineers began their four-game win streak with a victory over Cincinnati - that he was probably coaching for his job. He also knew that even if he managed to keep it, it would be for just one more year.

Oliver Luck said as much Thursday when he came clean on all things Stewart and Dana Holgorsen, the latter being the offensive guru from Oklahoma State who has been thrust upon Stewart as his offensive coordinator in 2011 and then will replace Stewart as WVU's head coach in 2012.

Luck met with Stewart, Stewart's advisor and the school's legal counsel more than a full month ago and spelled it all out.

"At that point Coach Stewart was informed that I was not satisfied with the direction that the program was going and that changes would be made,'' Luck said.

This wasn't just an informal meeting to hash things out and set a direction, either. At that meeting, Stewart agreed to and signed a modified contract.

"That agreement called for two options, one of which was Coach Stewart resigning after this season, the second of which was Coach Stewart staying on for next season,'' Luck said. "Obviously we've decided on the option of him staying on next season as our head football coach.''

That decision came following the four-game win streak at the end of the season, one that brought the Mountaineers that shared Big East championship, a third straight nine-win season under Stewart and nearly a through-the-back-door BCS bowl berth. Stewart had no say in it, aside from what he managed to accomplish on the field.

"That decision was mine and it was made at the conclusion of the season,'' Luck said. "I thought Coach Stewart did a marvelous job toward the second half of the year.

"We went on a great win streak and I thought he deserved the head coaching position for the 2011 season.''

All of that, however, raises at least a couple of compelling questions.

First is why, if Luck had decided a change had to be made - and there was already paperwork signed to make that change - would a strong finish make a difference? Holgorsen had already been targeted. Luck said he talked to him on Nov. 23 for the first time, which was three days before WVU beat Pitt. Even if Holgorsen had gotten away (perhaps to coach at Pitt?), Luck was going to find someone else. He had not only told Stewart that, he had convinced him to sign a modified contract.

So why was all of this left hanging? Why, if Luck had decided that a change needed to be made, was there any reason not to simply fire Stewart and get on with it?

Well, the obvious answer is public relations.

Already there is a mild backlash against Luck and the school for forcing Stewart out. Even some who wanted Stewart gone are sympathetic and think the way it was done leaves a great deal to be desired.

(Not that Luck is overly concerned about that, nor should he be. Bruised feelings are temporary. If he felt the change had to be made, he had to make it. And assuming the change works the way Luck envisions it, it will take roughly one 40-point outburst before everyone forgets that they felt sorry for Bill Stewart.)

But imagine the public relations nightmare it would have been had Stewart been outright fired following what could still be a 10-win season. Imagine Connecticut's Dave Teggart misses a 52-yard field goal at South Florida and the Mountaineers play in the Orange Bowl. Then Imagine WVU President Jim Clements traveling around the country to meetings with other academic big cheeses and being pointed to as the guy who fired the second-winningest coach (by percentage) in school history because, while his players graduated and generally stayed out of trouble, they didn't win enough for his tastes.

Ouch.

Of course, what the school is doing with the easing-out process is really no different. Stewart is still being fired because it didn't appear that he could win enough, but the university can at least pretend that this is something else. Shoot, they are comparing it to transitions at Wisconsin and Oregon, which makes it seem like this kind of thing is almost commonplace. Of course, it is not.

Now that's not a judgment on what has taken place. If Luck and Clements felt the change had to be made, fine, that's their call. I'm just trying to point out why there was a loophole left after that Nov. 14 meeting. And it was all a matter of public perception.

The second question I have, though, can't be answered so easily because Stewart himself won't return calls. If he knew this was a done deal more than a month ago - save for the possible one-year grace period - why has he continued to state his case at almost every opportunity? As recently as last weekend, he stood at a press conference and reeled off his list of accomplishments, from wins and bowls to graduation rates.

He even went so far as to chide the media for not doing a better job of telling that story, saying that he wasn't going to take out a billboard. He was perturbed that "you guys, my friends'' weren't doing it for him.

Nor has he apparently been forthcoming with his staff, which is certainly affected by all of this. Earlier this week, at least one assistant coach who was told about Holgorsen's impending hire replied, "Dana who?''

And all the while Stewart knew how this game was going to end and that, in fact, it was already over.

For that one I don't have an answer.

Reach Dave Hickman at 304-348-1734 or dphickm...@aol.com.