That's because you're professor and not a farmer.
Overproduction will continue to be problem. The real breakthoughs in yields are coming, better fertilizers usage through breeding, better drought resistance etc.
Corn production went from 6 to 7 billion bushels in 1985 to 13 billion in 2007. It will double again in less than 10 years with the current incentive to produce. Wheat, soybeans, name the crop, give the farmers the incentive that corn has to grow more, and you'll see the flood of crops continue.
I have an objective outlook unlike corn farmers who are knee deep in government mandates and subsidies. There is a growing (no pun intended) conflict between fuel and food. We have never had fuel mandates, especially the huge size of these mandates. The impact of the fuel mandates is difficult to determine. In the short run, ethanol mandates along with other factors (global demand, oil prices, and weak dollar) are leading to strong inflationary pressure.
The increase in future corn production is heavily driven by ethanol mandates and subsidies. Making corn more attractive to produce than other crops has already had many negative side effects. You could apply your argument to any good or service. Simply have government provide huge mandates and subsidies to shift demand. Government mandates and subsidies of the ethanol size will have many negative long-term impacts on any good or service.
I find the ethanol mandates and subsidies ironic. I have never read anything that indicates corn-based ethanol will ever be a viable alternative to petroleum. Somehow the ethanol mandates have been justified on the basis of some future biofuel source that will be economically viable. Bottom line: corn-based ethanol is a fraud with huge negative economic repurcussions in the short-term and long-term.