ESPN College Football

Happy Friday.

This is where you follow me on Twitter.

To the notes.

Dave from Birmingham writes: Not sure I get you. Why would you not want the four best teams to play in a playoff? That's what a playoff is about. I know there's a subjective part to this but that's inevitable. Is everyone that afraid of a consensus favoring the SEC because the SEC is the best conference?

Ted Miller: In a word, yes. And no matter how you frame it, that so-called consensus remains subjective. And I know this from experience.

In 1996, I worked at the Mobile Register and I was arguing with Mike Griffith, who then covered Alabama for the Register and voted in the AP poll. Now, everybody argues with Mike, but I thought he was being particularly obtuse this particular afternoon because he was touting Arizona State. I was blathering that Arizona State would have four losses if it played in the SEC.

Yes, I once was one of them. Why? Because that was the way I was raised. Football in the south, as writer Rick Bragg once ostentatiously pandered, is like a "knife fight in a ditch"! That's a bunch of silliness, but such sentiments nonetheless are inculcated into fans and they seep into the media coverage -- in the Southeast as well as other parts of the country where fetishizing the peculiarity of the South is embraced. So I understand the roots of the "just because" reaction of so many SEC fans. And I experienced its power as a sportswriter.

When I moved out to Seattle to cover Washington, I still had a "just because" feeling about West Coast vs. Southeast football. When Miami came to Husky Stadium in 2000, I thought the Hurricanes would blast the Huskies. Ergo, my initial transformative moment was watching Washington physically manhandle the Hurricanes. Don't be fooled by the final score: The Huskies owned Miami that day.

My point: Regional biases are strong and they cloud thinking, even when they feel rational. That's why there needs to be a safeguard in our new four-team playoff system for some degree of objectivity, which prioritizing conference champions provides.

I know any questions about SEC super-awesomeness make SEC folks angry. I know: Six crystal footballs. No one is doubting the SEC's ability to dominate the BCS system. And I have no doubt that dominance of a subjective system -- a beauty contest, really -- has helped push the SEC closer to something that can be judged as a more objective superiority (read: self-fulfilling prophecy).

But if we're going to have a national college football playoff, we need to create a selection process that doesn't leave open the possibility of a tag always going to a runner from a certain conference, just because.

---

Edward from Atlanta writes: Do you think USC coach Lane Kiffin and his staff are better at recruiting than Pete Carroll and his staff? I look at the fact that Lane Kiffin is only working with 15 scholarships and he is still bringing in top recruits after everything that has taking placed. Just imagine if he did had all his scholarships he would probably have a top 3 or top 5 recruiting class every year.

Ted Miller: No.

Kiffin and his staff are recruiting very well, but they can't do much better than Pete Carroll and his staff did from 2002-2009. You say top-three to -five each year? Carroll landed the No. 1 class multiple times. Any rare rating outside the top five was deemed an off-year. Carroll's recruiting run rates among the best run a program has produced -- think Bobby Bowden in the glory years at Florida State.

It's also worth noting that Carroll and Kiffin share two ace recruiters: Kiffin and Ed Orgeron.

---

Jeff from Tempe, Ariz., writes: Who do you think is going to be the starting quarterback for ASU to begin the season?

Ted Miller: That's a tough one. When I watched practice, I thought Mike Bercovici was so much better as a passer that he should be the guy. But then you have to realize that new coach Todd Graham wants to run some spread option, and that requires the quarterback to be a running threat. Bercovici is no running threat, while 6-foot-5, 242-pound Michael Eubank is. And Eubank has potential as a passer, though at present he's raw.

The easy answer is start Bercovici but use some packages with Eubank. But that's sort of a fan answer. Most coaches don't like playing two quarterbacks. They'll tell you if you play two, it means you don't have any. And QBs are not big fans of sharing the job.

I used to be a Bercovici lean, but now I'm leaning toward Eubank. Here's why: This team is much better at running back than at receiver. Even with Bercovici's live arm, this probably is going to be a run-first offense, and it makes things much more difficult for a defense if it must account for the QB as a runner. Eubank can become at least an adequate passer. Bercovici is unlikely to do the same as a runner.

---

Mark from Garden Grove, Calif., writes: If you could play matchmaker, which Big Ten/Pac-12 schools would you pair for the 2017 season -- and why?

Ted Miller: OK, I'll bite, basing things on where the college football world is today.

• Oregon-Ohio State: Urban Meyer vs. Chip Kelly. 'Nuff said.
• Arizona-Michigan: The Rich Rodriguez Bowl.
• Stanford-Wisconsin: Two really good schools that play smashmouth football.
• Oregon State-Michigan State: All that green would have the Beavers feeling like they're play Oregon.
• USC-Penn State: Two old-school powers whose uniforms are among the most recognizable.
• Nebraska-Arizona State: Any Sun Devils recall 1996?
• Northwestern-California: Two elite academic universities.
• Washington-Iowa: A rematch of the 1982, 1991 Rose Bowls, both won by the Huskies.
• Colorado-Purdue: Two great mascots. (Colorado would have been a good one for Nebraska, too.)
• Utah-Illinois: Utes vs. Fighting Illini.
• Washington State-Minnesota: The Cold Bowl.
• UCLA-Indiana: Two old-school basketball powers playing football.

---

Rapsai from Eugene, Ore., writes: Ted, with Oregon's lack of depth at RB, do you see Josh Huff maybe sliding into the backfield to play some RB for the Ducks next season?

Ted Miller: A perfectly reasonable solution if there are injury issues in the backfield.

Does it make me a bad person that I don't think the Ducks are going to hurting at running back? I just think with Chip Kelly's emphasis on speed in recruiting that the Ducks will pretty much have an answer at RB, no matter how many guys get hurt. Recall that Kenjon Barner started out as a defensive back.

---

John from Los Angeles writes: I guess this falls into my "you know your old when you have a story for everything" file. In reading the post about Jonathan Ogden going into the HOF, I noticed your comment on his massive size. My buddies and I take a football road trip every year. We used to include the Baltimore Ravens in the trip because Will Demps (former Ravens safety) played at the high school where my buddy is the AD and he would get us tickets. Anyway, after a game against the Bengals at Cincinnati we are standing next to the Ravens team bus talking to Demps, Ogden and his people come up next to us - and he literally blocks out the sun!! You truly cannot appreciate how BIG the guy is until you stand right next to him. My buddy is wearing his USC cap (he is a big fan), so to amuse myself I keep whispering "Jack, show Ogden your hat." My friend kept his back to Ogden the entire time.

Ted Miller: I remember covering the 1996 Citrus Bowl between Ohio State and Tennessee -- which was cool because both were ranked No. 4 entering the game -- and walking up to the Ohio State bus. I saw No. 75 horsing around around this itty-bitty guy with a bald head who was No. 27.

The itty bitty guy was 6-foot-3, 240-pound, Heisman Trophy-winning running back Eddie George, and No. 75 was 6-foot-7, 325-pound Orlando Pace, who at that moment was the biggest dude I'd ever seen.

And Ogden -- at 6-foot-9, 345 -- darn near dwarfs Pace.

Only guy who ever impressed me as more spectacularly large was Shaquille O'Neal.

---

In case you haven't noticed, we've got a bit of a theme going on this week -- important games in the Pac-12. Obviously, everyone is circling the Nov. 3 showdown between USC and Oregon in Los Angeles. But there are other games to enjoy along the way. So this week we're looking at games we're most excited about.

Ted Miller: I like measuring-stick games, games that perhaps reveal the talent and heart of a team, as well as, of course, where they rank in the Pac-12 pecking order. We have a perfect example Sept. 27 (a Thursday) in Seattle: Stanford's visit to Washington, which will be played in CenturyLink Field, the Seahawks' stadium.

The obvious measure of this game's importance is this: The winner steps up in the Pac-12 North Division pecking order, the loser steps back. The winner can imagine challenging Oregon for the division title, while the loser's attention likely turns to more attainable quarry. But it's more than that. For one, it's likely both teams already will have suffered a defeat. The Huskies visit LSU on Sept. 8, while Stanford hosts USC on Sept. 15. Those opponents likely will rank Nos. 1 and 2 in the nation. This game, therefore, can serve to redirect one team's early-season trajectory. It's much better to head into October with one loss than with two.

For Stanford, this is about announcing the program's health in the post-Andrew Luck Era. Beating the Huskies on the road likely would re-establish the Cardinal as a top-25 team, where, based on the schedule, they could remain all season.

But, really, the weight falls more heavily on Washington. Why? For one, Stanford has beaten the Huskies four games in a row. But that's not the biggest issue. It's not even that the three most recent games have been blowouts. It's the nature of those blowouts. Stanford has unmanned Washington during that winning streak. Huskies fans, cover your eyes. You don't want to read this. Stanford has averaged 322 yards rushing in those four victories. 322! Last year, the Cardinal set a school record with 446 yards rushing in a 65-21 victory. The Cardinal only had 278 in 2010, but, of course, the final count was 41-zip. At Husky Stadium!

It hurts to lose no matter what. And it hurts to get blown out. But for a football team to get physically manhandled ... that's humiliation. It's hard to describe the recent turn in this series any other way. The Huskies' pride is on the line. New defensive coordinator Justin Wilcox was brought in to make sure no opponent rushes for 322 yards against Washington. It will be interesting to see if he can deliver in this early conference test. Or if post-Luck Stanford keeps churning along, winning with character and cruelty.

Kevin Gemmell: I too enjoy a good measuring-stick game -- and I don't think there is a bigger one early in the season than USC's trip to Utah on Oct. 4. First, it's a Thursday night game, which means a national TV audience. It's at Rice-Eccles Stadium -- one of my favorite venues -- and the place should be going crazy.

For the sake of argument, I'm going to work off the assumption that both USC and Utah are 4-0 heading into this game. If any Hawaii, Syracuse, Stanford, Cal, Northern Colorado, Utah State, Brigham Young or Arizona State fans take exception to that argument, I know Ted would love to hear about it in his mailbag.

In terms of measuring-stick games, there is none bigger on the 2012 schedule than this one for Utah -- which is desperate to find its way into the conversation as one of the Pac-12's elite. A victory over the Trojans -- who presumably will be one of the top-ranked teams in the country (if not No. 1) on Oct. 4 -- would go a long way toward achieving that.

Both teams will be coming off a bye week, so there is a good chance they will be rested and healthy. But the Trojans have the tougher road through the first four weeks. USC will have been put through the meat grinder against two top-rated defenses in Stanford and Cal before their bye. Then they come to Salt Lake City against -- arguably -- the best defensive front in the conference.

That makes this a pretty significant measuring-stick game for the Trojans, too. Three consecutive wins over three of the top front-sevens in the Pac-12 will likely answer any questions about the Trojans' toughness. By the way, they're on the road again the following week at Washington. This is just step three in an awfully difficult four-game stretch.

USC has the stronger offense -- even Utah fans won't dispute what the Trojans bring to the table with Matt Barkley and Co.-- but Utah's defensive line is as good as it gets. And one cannot throw the ball if one's face is buried in the turf.

This projects to be a brutal, physical game with the winner taking decisive command of the Pac-12 South.

A victory for Utah would catapult the Utes into conference legitimacy and mark that they have arrived. A USC victory re-affirms its status as the team to beat in the South and will likely leave the rest of us licking our chops for Nov. 3.

2011 overall record: 7-6
2011 conference record: 5-4 (3rd, North)
Returning starters: Offense: 8; defense: 7; kicker/punter: 0

Top returners
QB Keith Price, TE Austin Seferian-Jenkins, WR Kasen Williams, S Sean Parker, CB Desmond Trufant, DT Danny Shelton, DE Josh Shirley

Key losses
RB Chris Polk, OT Senio Kelemete, WR Jermaine Kearse, DT Alameda Ta'amu, LB Cort Dennison

2011 statistical leaders (*returner)
Rushing: Chris Polk (1,488 yards)
Passing: Keith Price* (3,063 yards)
Receiving: Jermaine Kearse (699 yards)
Tackles: Cort Dennison (128)
Sacks: Josh Shirley* (8.5)
Interceptions: Sean Parker* (4)

Spring answers
1. For the defense: Coach Steve Sarkisian rebuilt his defensive staff around star coordinator Justin Wilcox, and the early returns are promising. And not just because of the coaches. There's more talent on defense than the Huskies showed during a terrible 2011 campaign. The chief task this spring, however, was blending in the new coaches -- five of them, including offensive coordinator Eric Kiesau -- with the players and Sarkisian's ways.

2. Secondary not an issue: The Huskies have some folks who can play -- and have played -- in the secondary, starting with cornerback Desmond Trufant and safety Sean Parker. There's also Justin Glenn, Greg Ducre, Will Shamburger and Tre Watson, a transfer from Central Washington. Plus, touted safety Shaq Thompson arrives in the fall, and redshirt freshman Travis Feeney is promising.

3. Not unskilled: There was reason entering spring to fret about the skill positions, other than quarterback. The Huskies lost running back Chris Polk as well as receivers Jermaine Kearse and Devin Aguilar. But, after spring, things seem at least solid. At tailback, it's probably going to be by committee with Jesse Callier and Bishop Sankey, as well as junior-college transfer Antavius Sims and redshirt freshman Dezden Petty. And maybe Deontae Cooper comes back healthy? At receiver, James Johnson, Kasen Williams, Cody Bruns, who redshirted last season, and Kevin Smith (if healthy) give the Huskies a solid crew. Some redshirt freshmen and intriguing incoming players could also get into the mix.

Fall questions
1. Oooooo-Line? The Huskies should be welcoming back four starters, but guard Colin Porter was forced to retire due to injuries, and other guys were beat up this spring. If Colin Tanigawa, who missed all of spring with a knee injury, tackle Erik Kohler and center Drew Schaefer all come back healthy, then things should be OK. But that remains to be seen.

2. LB woes? It's still uncertain whether the Huskies will be primarily 3-4 of 4-3 on defense, so we don't know how things will shake out at linebacker. We do know that the Huskies were bad there last year. Three safeties -- Taz Stevenson, Nate Fellner and Evan Zeger -- moved to LB to bolster things, while John Timu, Princeton Fuimaono -- both returning starters -- Thomas Tutogi, Garret Gilliland and Jamaal Kearse are in the mix. Next to the offensive line, this is a position where fans should feel free to be concerned.

3. Backing up Price? Redshirt freshman Derrick Brown is No. 2 at present, mostly by default. But two touted freshmen arrive in the fall: Jeff Lindquist and Cyler Miles. Brown improved over the course of the spring, but the freshmen are good enough to challenge him immediately. And, keep in mind, the No. 2 QB isn't important until he becomes your most important player.

Last week we gave you our thoughts on a couple of Pac-12 players who went undrafted this year. It wasn't really a debate, since we both felt that Washington running back Chris Polk not getting drafted was the biggest surprise.

So instead, we just opined on a couple of undrafted free agents.

Miller predicts that Oregon safety Eddie Pleasant is going to have a fruitful NFL career, though he wasn't all that surprised that he wasn't drafted.

Gemmell was slightly surprised that a team didn't take a chance on ASU linebacker Vontaze Burfict given the NFL's history of drafting players with questionable character.

There were a few other players who we thought might have ended up as draft picks but didn't make the cut.

Washington linebacker Cort Dennison, for example, who led the Pac-12 in tackles last season and was a second-team all-conference selection.

Also, Stanford safety Delano Howell was predicted by many to go in the draft, but ended up as a free agent.

Then there was Arizona State wide receiver Gerell Robinson -- who had more receiving yards than any wide receiver in the conference last year.

Which player did you feel should have been drafted but wasn't?

Our topic is new looks to old rivalries. Other ESPN.com writers are looking at Ohio State-Michigan (Urban Meyer vs. Brady Hoke), Oklahoma State flipping the script on Oklahoma and the new feel of Clemson-South Carolina.

So why am I tossing Oregon-Washington into that pool?

Well, there's this conversation that has taken place between trash-talking Ducks and Huskies fans for years.

Ducks in 2004: We beat you 31-6.

Huskies in 2004: But when did you last win a Rose Bowl!

Ducks in 2005: We beat you 45-21.

Huskies in 2005: But when did you last win a Rose Bowl!

Fast-forward.

Ducks in 2012: We've beaten you eight consecutive years by an average margin of 25 points and never by fewer than 17 points.

Huskies in 2012: But when did you last win a Rose Bowl!

Ducks in 2012: Ha!

Huskies in 2012: Drat.

When Oregon outlasted Wisconsin 45-38 in January, it won its first Rose Bowl in 95 years. We know this because immediately after the game, coach Chip Kelly -- who often tells reporters he doesn't care about such things -- hollered to the crowd, "It's been 95 years since you could say: Oregon Ducks, Rose Bowl champions!"

I have long been an accidental tourist with this rivalry. I covered Washington's seventh -- and last -- Rose Bowl victory after the 2000 season. I've also covered a bunch of Ducks-Huskies games. I've been accused by each set of fans of being a homer for the other at least once a week since the Pac-12 blog crawled out of the Mother Ship in 2008 and went, "Ooooooo, a mailbag! This is where I'll get compliments from everyone!"

When I first arrived in Seattle in 1999, having no idea these programs hated each other, the Huskies were still the Big Brother in the Northwest. They mostly owned Oregon, Oregon State and Washington State. Now the Ducks are the top, er, Ducks. Not only have they beaten Washington eight consecutive times, they also haven't lost to Washington State since 2006 or Oregon State since 2007.

The Ducks' dominance of Washington -- winning and winning big -- has been mostly stunning. Still, the Huskies had some grounds for rebuttal. The program had been a national power and certainly would be again. And its trophy case contained seven Rose Bowl trophies. Oregon fans could -- fairly -- accuse the Huskies of living in the past, but the Rose Bowl tweak scored a point. And any honest Oregon fan will tell you it smarted.

Or it did smart. It's no longer valid. That page has turned, thereby redefining the rivalry in a measurable way.

Of course, Huskies fans can still hoist a national title into the air. Oregon still doesn't have one of those.

Yet.

Ted Miller talks with Washington coach Steve Sarkisian about the looming changes in college football's postseason and the Huskies' spring.

Washington athletic director Scott Woodward told reporters Monday the renovation of Husky Stadium is "on time and on budget and that's music to my ears."

Further, as the Seattle Times reported, the school has nearly reached its fundraising goal of $50 million for before the project is completed in advance of the 2013 season. It already has raised $48.5 million.

This also is interesting:

Also, [UW's associate athletic director for operations and capital projects Chip Lydum] said today there is no exact number set yet for capacity, though it will likely be right around 70,000. That's officially less than the listed capacity of 72,500 of the old stadium. But officials note some of those were obstructed view, which won't be the case in the new stadium. "There will be many more better seats than we have currently,'' Woodward said.

Washington will play at CenturyLink Field, the Seattle Seahawks home stadium, next year while the renovation is ongoing. Woodward also said that, despite playing downtown and away from campus, season ticket sales are brisk.

Woodward also reported that UW is at a 95 percent renewal rate for season tickets for next year at CenturyLink Field which he said is "incredible.'' He said he thought there would be more falloff with some fans not wanting to go to CenturyLink for the year. "I was doubtful, but proven wrong,'' he said. UW sold 42,500 last season.

There is no reason that CenturyLink can't feel like a big-time home-field advantage for the Huskies, even if they are away from their home turf. If they can consistently draw 60,000 next fall (capacity is 67,000) -- the Huskies averaged 62,531 in 2011 -- visitors won't feel terribly comfortable. CenturyLink is one of the loudest NFL stadiums.

All players are equal, but some players are more equal than others. That's the basis of our Most Important Player series.

First off, quarterbacks are excluded to make things more interesting. It goes without saying that Arizona's Matt Scott, USC's Matt Barkley and Washington's Keith Price are their teams' most important players. Their losses would be catastrophic.

And most important doesn't necessarily have to be "best." An All-American's backup can be pretty darn good too.

Our most important guys are players who could swing a win total one way or the other, based on their living up to expectations. Or their absence.

Washington: DT Danny Shelton

2011 production: Shelton played in all 13 games as a true freshman, starting the final two. He finished with 11 tackles and a fumble recovery.

Why Shelton is important: Price is the Huskies' most important player, but I thought I had this one figured out for the non-Price division. Then Bob Condotta, with what I'd guess was one of those gleeful cackles he is known for, did this to make things difficult on me -- polling Huskies fans on whom they thought was the team's most important player after Price. Before seeing this poll, my plan had been to go with veteran center Drew Schaefer. Huskies fans, however, favored Shelton. I frumped over this. I didn't want to be swayed by a Tyranny of the Masses or Conventional Wisdom. So while sitting in a coffee shop in order to feel all Seattle-y, I engaged in a meditative debate inside my head with Washington fans. It was going well, but then a bunch of Oregon fans showed up. Amid the ensuing trash talk, everyone ignored my entreaties to remain focused on the earnest debate at hand, even when I barked that it was rude of them blowing me off inside my own head. (None of you know the psychic pressures involved in this job.)

Schaefer would have been a good choice, but alas, I'm going with Shelton -- just like Huskies fans -- based on what the 6-foot-1, 323-pound sophomore could become this year. If Shelton plays to the ability he strongly hinted at toward the end of last season, he will become an all-conference sort of defensive tackle. Further, if he does that, he could become an ideal, space-eating noseguard in the 3-4 scheme new coordinator Justin Wilcox wants to adopt. If Shelton becomes that guy, just about everything changes for a defense that was awful in 2011. As that guy, Shelton would, more often than not, command two blockers. That would not only make life easier for the linebackers against the run but also could free up promising pass-rusher Josh Shirley on the edge. Basically, it would make the Huskies' defense feel as if it has 12 guys, not unlike how Utah often feels with DT Star Lotulelei. The Huskies do have other big interior D-linemen, but 339-pound Semisi Tokolahi and 325-pound Lawrence Lagafuaina have struggled with consistency and injury issues. Shelton needs to be that guy. My only pause on this is that the Huskies' defense was lousy last year even with 333-pound Alameda Ta'amu, a likely early-round NFL draft pick this week, and Shelton on hand. Still, Shelton playing to his potential makes me see concentric circles of improvement radiating from his wide frame throughout the Huskies defense. Or maybe that's echoing sound waves from all that Huskies-Ducks griping?

Washington's offensive line took a big blow this week with the forced injury retirement of offensive guard Colin Porter, a two-year starter.

Here's the Seattle Times report, which notes "Porter is suffering from 'degenerative arthritis' in each of his shoulders." And, by the way, he played all last season, despite the condition. So, yeah, this is a tough guy here.

The Huskies were set up to have four returning starters on the line in 2012, losing only left tackle Senio Kelemete to graduation. Now that number is three, and there are other injury concerns, most particularly guard Colin Tanigawa, who tore his ACL at Oregon State on Nov. 19 and is questionable for the 2012 season. Further, right tackle Erik Kohler is nursing nagging injuries and is limited while playing second-team guard this spring.

That leaves just senior center Drew Schaefer manning his 2011 spot this spring.

When you add in the loss of RB Chris Polk, it's reasonable to wonder about the Huskies' running game in 2012.

Coach Steve Sarkisian is a big believer in a physical running game. The Huskies rushed 452 times last year, compared to 406 pass attempts. With junior QB Keith Price entering his second year as a starter, it's hard to believe those numbers won't at least reverse.

That, of course, means more exposure for Price to getting hit. The Huskies, despite a veteran line, gave up 34 sacks last year, which ranked 98th in the nation. You might recall that Price struggled with nagging injuries much of the 2011 season, in large part because of that spotty protection. Further, with the transfer of Nick Montana, the Huskies' backup QBs, which could end up being a true freshman, have no game experience.

So let's just say it would be a good thing for Washington for Tanigawa and Kohler to get healthy. And for some young guys to step up and show their stuff this spring.

The current number is six. That is six Pac-12 players projected to go in the first round of the NFL draft, according to Mel Kiper's latest mock draft .

They are the usual six you'd expect; Andrew Luck, David DeCastro, Jonathan Martin and Coby Fleener from Stanford along with Matt Kalil and Nick Perry from USC. The last time a school from the conference had four players taken in the first round was USC in 2008 (see list below).

Oregon's LaMichael James is the lone Pac-12 player projected for the second round (this is Kiper's first swing at a two-round mock this season).

So is six for the first round good? Bad? Par for the course? As Ted Miller is so fond of saying, glad you asked.

Since 2000, the Pac-10 (since we're not including Colorado or Utah from previous drafts) has only had six or more players taken in the first round twice. There was the monster draft in 2003 where eight Pac-10 players were taken in the first round. And then in 2008, six players were taken.

Here's a look at the conference's first round picks since 2000:

• 2011 (3): Jake Locker (Washington, No. 8 overall); Tyron Smith (USC, No. 9); Cameron Jordan (Cal, No. 24)
• 2010 (2): Tyson Alualu (Cal, No. 10); Jahvid Best (Cal, No. 30)
• 2009 (4): Mark Sanchez (USC, No. 5); Brian Cushing (USC, No. 15); Alex Mack (Cal, No. 21); Clay Matthews (USC, No. 26)
• 2008 (6): Sedrick Ellis (USC, No. 7); Keith Rivers (USC, No. 9); Jonathan Stewart (Oregon, No. 13); Sam Baker (USC, No. 21); Antoine Cason (Arizona, No. 27); Lawrence Jackson (USC, No. 28)
• 2007 (1): Marshawn Lynch (Cal, No. 12)
• 2006 (4): Reggie Bush (USC, No. 2); Matt Leinart (USC, No. 10); Haloti Ngata (Oregon, No. 12); Marcedes Lewis (UCLA, No. 28)
• 2005 (3): Mike Williams (USC, No. 10); Aaron Rodgers (Cal, No. 24); Mike Patterson (USC, No. 31)
• 2004 (3): Reggie Williams (Washington, No. 9); Kenechi Udeze (USC, No. 20); Steven Jackson (Oregon State, No. 24)
• 2003 (8): Carson Palmer (USC, No. 1); Terrell Suggs (Arizona State, No. 10); Marcus Trufant (Washington State, No. 11); Troy Polamalu (USC, No. 16); Kyle Boller (Cal, No. 19); Kwame Harris (Stanford, No. 26); Nick Barnett (Oregon State, No. 29); Nnamdi Asomugha (Cal, No. 31)
• 2002 (4, also the first year with 32 picks): Joey Harrington (Oregon, No. 3); Levi Jones (Arizona State, No. 10); Jerramy Stevens (Washington, No. 28); Robert Thomas (UCLA, No. 31)
• 2001 (4): Andre Carter (Cal, No. 7); Adam Archuleta (Arizona State, No. 20); Freddie Mitchell (UCLA, No. 25); Todd Heap (Arizona State, No. 31)
• 2000 (4): Deltha O'Neal (Cal, No. 15); Erik Flowers (Arizona State, No. 26); R.Jay Soward (USC, No. 29); Trung Canidate (Arizona, No. 31).

So to answer the question, yes, six would be an impressive haul. Here's Kiper's latest Big Board and his updated top 5 at each position .

Todd McShay also offers his latest top 32 , which doesn't include Fleener.

Max Browne (Sammamish, Wash./Skyline), the nation's top-rated prep quarterback, committed to USC on Wednesday night, picking the Trojans over Alabama, Oklahoma and Washington.

Browne, 6-foot-5, 205 pounds, completed 70 percent of his passes for 4,034 yards and 45 touchdowns in 2011.

National signing day in is Feb. 6, 2013.

Here's the Seattle Times on Brown's decision, which is a major blow to Washington's in-state recruiting.

Browne is the second consecutive elite QB from Skyline High School, a Washington state prep powerhouse, to opt to leave the state instead of signing with the Huskies. Jake Heaps signed with BYU over the hometown Huskies in 2010. Heaps has since transferred to Kansas.

Max Browne (Sammamish, Wash./Skyline), one of the nation's top quarterback recruits, will announce his commitment Wednesday at 7 p.m. PT, according to ESPN Recruiting, which reports, "Browne has narrowed his choices to Alabama, Oklahoma, USC and Washington, although with recent visits to see the Sooners and Trojans, most think it will come down to those two programs."

So USC or Oklahoma for the 6-foot-5, 205 pounder?

Browne leaving for the Sooners would be a blow for the hometown Huskies, who are struggling to build the proverbial "wall" around their home state. During the 2011-12 recruiting season, most of the elite, local prospects crossed state lines to play football. The state featured five elite recruits: Offensive linemen Zach Banner and Josh Garnett, running back KeiVarae Russell, receiver Cedric Dozier and QB Jeff Lindquist. Only Lindquist signed with the Huskies.

Of course, the Huskies did much better in 2011 when they signed TE Austin Seferian-Jenkins, WR Kasen Williams, DT Danny Shelton -- three players who, by the way, lived up to their recruiting hype as true freshmen.

Still, in order to return to the nation's elite, Washington must win most of the recruiting battles for in-state prospects most years. That's part of the reason coach Steve Sarkisian was willing to pay top dollar to lure ace recruiter Tosh Lupoi away from California.

While some prospects go in search of a warmer, sunnier climate, and there's little coaches can do to charm them out of that thinking, part of getting the Huskies back into the nation's top 25 is making elite recruits want to stay home. For every Jake Locker who decides to play for the Huskies, there are too many guys like Jonathan Stewart (Oregon), Stephen Schilling (Michigan), Taylor Mays (USC), David DeCastro (Stanford), Deandre Coleman (California) and Jake Heaps (BYU).

As for Browne, the situation at Washington would seem ideal for him. Keith Price would be a senior his redshirt freshman year, giving him a year to acclimate himself before fighting for the job in 2014.

From ESPN Recruiting: "Browne completed 70 percent of his passes for 4,034 yards and 45 touchdowns as a junior. He plans to enroll early at his school of choice and has a good shot to be recognized as the top quarterback in the class of 2013."

It will be a big loss for the Huskies if he opts to cross state lines.

Starters in, starters out. That's college football. Players' eligibility expires, and they leave for the rest of their lives, whether that includes the NFL or not.

And they leave behind shoes of various sizes that need to be filled.

Our concern with this series? The biggest shoes -- in some cases Shaq-like size 23s.

Biggest shoes: Running back Chris Polk

Polk earned first-team All-Pac-12 honors and finished third in the conference in rushing in 2011, earning a No. 9 spot on our list of the top-25 players in the Pac-12 this past season. He rushed for 4,049 yards during his career, which ranks No. 2 on the Huskies' all-time list. He scored 26 touchdowns along the way and -- oh by the way -- caught 78 passes. But he's off to the NFL. He leaves behind huge shoes, particularly if the Huskies want to remain balanced, instead of relying entirely on quarterback Keith Price.

Stepping in: Running back Jesse Callier

Callier is not unlike Oregon's Kenjon Barner. He's been a capable backup to a superstar for two years, as Barner backed up LaMichael James for three seasons. The 5-foot-10, 203-pound Callier has rushed for 693 yards -- 5.6 yards per carry -- and caught 25 passes over the past two seasons. He's also seen extensive action as a kick returner. He's looked good at times, but not spectacular. He will get the first chance to prove he's an every-down, 25-carries-a-game guy. But he will be pushed by sophomore Bishop Sankey and JC transfer Antavius Sims, who is likely to play a hybrid running back/wide receiver role. No matter what, Callier won't get all the touches, just as Polk didn't. But it will be up to Callier to take over as the showcase back, instead of becoming a 1A with another runner becoming 1B. Or the Huskies could be going with the proverbial "running back by committee."

You can check out the rest of the "Big Shoes" series here.

Washington coach Steve Sarkisian held his annual pre-spring news conference Friday, and he had good news and bad news.

The good news is he likes the Huskies' starting quarterback -- junior Keith Price -- and their depth of athletic skill, which he called "probably our deepest team we've had."

The bad news is a lack of depth on both lines, in large part due to a surprisingly long injury list.

"I wish we were a little bit more healthy coming into spring ball," he said.

Injuries? Here's what Sarkisian listed: DE Hau'oli Jamora (knee, out), RB Deontae Cooper (knee, out), OG Colin Tanigawa (knee, out), OG Colin Porter (both shoulders, out), OT Erik Kohler (unspecified injuries, limited), DT Semisi Tokolahi (foot, out), S Travis Feeney (shoulder, limited), S James Sample (shoulder, limited), FB-HB-LB Cooper Pelluer (shoulder, limited), and WR Kevin Smith (knee, out).

The positive spin here? That younger players will get more opportunities to strut their stuff.

Some other quick notes:

• Some position changes: Taz Stevenson and Evan Zeger have switched to outside linebacker from safety, and junior college transfer Antavius Sims is listed as an "athlete" -- running back/slotback -- instead of in the secondary. Sarkisian said there will be plenty of moving around on both sides of the ball, particularly with injuries leaving voids.
• On the new defense with new coordinator Justin Wilcox, "We're starting at ground zero on defensive side of the ball." Sarkisian said there will be an initial struggle just figuring out Wilcox's terminology. "It's like learning a new language," Sarkisian said.
• With the transfer of Nick Montana, redshirt freshman Derrick Brown will get a lot of work -- and a head start -- on the backup quarterback job. Of course, Brown and Price both need to get familiar with how new offensive coordinator Eric Kiesau wants to do things.
• Fullback Tim Tucker, who was suspended from the Alamo Bowl, was kicked off the team for team rules violations.
• Players who Sarkisian singled out as intriguing after good offseasons: tight end Michael Hartvigson, cornerback Marcus Peters, defensive end Jarret Finau and cornerback Greg Ducre.
• Sarkisian said an area of interest is replacing red-zone production from standouts such as running back Chris Polk, and receivers Jermaine Kearse and Devin Aguilar. He also said it will be interesting to see if Jesse Callier, Polk's backup, proves himself to be a guy who can handle 25 carries a game as a feature back.
• Sarkisian said the Alamo Bowl loss to Baylor left the Huskies with "a lot to prove" and "A little bit of a bad taste in their mouths."
• The spring game at CenturyLink Field will be played at 1 p.m. April 28.

Continuing our Q&A with new Washington defensive coordinator Justin Wilcox.

Read Part I here.

Tell me about your defensive philosophy: What are the first things you tell your guys that need to happen?

Justin Wilcox: The first thing is you've got to develop an identity. The great thing is, from the core values Steve Sarkisian has implemented here in terms of the competitiveness, the toughness, the work ethic, those things have been ingrained in these kids. How they train, how they work, how they prepare. That is paramount to being a successful program. From our side of the ball, on top of everything Coach Sark stands for, the toughness and competing that we're going to emphasize to these kids, the big thing on defense, especially this day and age, is the execution. Effort and toughness -- you have to have those. They are non-negotiable. Unfortunately, they won't win you games. You can play with the greatest effort and the greatest toughness, but if you don't execute at a high level, you're going to play bad defense. What we need to focus on is being able to execute at a high level, down-in, down-out, up-tempo, for four quarters, even when we are tired. That's just conditioning your mind, conditioning your body. That's what we're focusing on. The scheme is important. There's no doubt. But how you execute the scheme is even more important. That's what we're focusing on this spring, getting good at what we do. There are a lot of different defenses, a lot of different ways to do things. Throughout the country, everybody's got a little bit different wrinkle. But at the end of the day, if you're a 3-4 team or a 4-3 team or a quarters team or a three-deep team, you've got to be good at what you're doing. That's what our focus is going to be. We've got to find out a little bit who we are in terms of personnel and what we think we can be good at. We're always going to be fundamentally driven. We've got to be great tacklers; we've got to be great at taking on blocks; and we've got to be great at covering people. That's what defensive football is. Whatever scheme we play, whatever coverages we play, it always goes back to tackling, taking on blocks and covering people. Those are the things that we're going to work on day-in, and day-out. You could have 800 defenses, and they could be the greatest defenses on the board, make the most sense and cover everything, but if you are not good at what you're doing, you're just flailing in the wind -- a jack of all trades, master of none. We need to find our identity of what we are going to be schematically, and then play better football. I know that sounds kind of boring but that's the truth. It's going to be fundamentals for us. And it's going to be execution.

Give me a CliffsNotes version of your scheme. It seems more teams are using 3-4, odd-front looks, and that's more your reputations, too, but you also seem kind of flexible.

JW: Yeah, that's fair to say. We're a little more 3-4, under-front, odd-front in our base downs. We've got to play more nickel and possibly some dime, depending on our personnel, because we will see a fair amount of 11-personnel, 10-personnel -- meaning one-back stuff. So we will practice that the first day, nickel and some dime, so we can try to get our best coverage matchups, which will give you more flexibility with what you can do, coverage-wise, when you have another DB out there. We need to find out, personnel-wise, throughout the spring, who we are. Who can we put the stress on? Who are the guys on our defense who we can say: This guy can win the one-on-one battles. And if we need to help protect another position, that we've got to build it around that. We'll install our base coverages out of our base group, our nickel coverages and all of our blitzes and fire zones, and then we'll kind of hone it in on what we think we'll be good at. You're going to do the scheme part of it, but we really need to practice the fundamentals and get good at it -- playing three-deep, playing quarters, playing press, taking on blocks and tackling. All those fundamental things that sometimes can get loose if you are not careful.

What have you seen on film from the guys you've got coming back: Did anything stand out?

JW: I'm excited. There's some good young talent. There are some edge player -- the Josh Shirleys, Hau'oli Jamora, [Andrew] Hudson -- those guys who are more edge-type guys. We've got some young defensive ends who we think have a chance, guys who haven't played a lot. There's a young noseguard who has flashed, Danny Shelton. You probably know about him. We've got to continue to develop our defensive ends and continue to develop in recruiting in terms of size and length. At linebacker, it's going to be very competitive there. We've got some guys who we might move around in terms of changing positions, to try to give us a little bit more flexibility at those spots. The secondary, there are some good young players. Obviously, you've got [cornerback] Desmond Trufant coming back. That's a big deal for us and we're excited for him. There will be some competition at corner. Greg Ducre, Marcus Peters, some freshmen who redshirted. At safety, you've got Sean Parker and some guys who played last year, Nate Fellner and Justin Glenn. There's a redshirt freshman who has flashed some, Travis Feeney. I'm trying not to miss anybody. The other thing is we'll play a lot of nickel, so developing that nickel position, and possibly a dime, because we have some of those body types. Again, we're trying to find out who are the best guys and who do we think gives us the best chance to win. If you get so rigid on, 'We're a 4-3 team, so we're going to play 4-3 no matter what,' but what if your fifth DB is better than your third LB, then you're kind of spinning your wheels and not playing with your best guys. We want our best guys out there.

How much can a defense improve from one year to the next? Do fans need to be patient, or do you feel like this defense can put up much better numbers than in 2011?

JW: It's hard for me to get into all that. I could stand on a soap box and say, 'We're going to do this, this and this,' but really it's going to be a product of what we accomplish this spring, in our offseason workouts and fall camp. As long as we are playing as well as we can possibly play, that's what I care about. The stats are what they are, as long as we are playing up to our capability that's what I am focused on. I don't think any of us are very patient. We want to play good defense. That's why we are here. That's what we spend our time trying to do. That's a multi-level question. For me to sit here and say, 'We're going to be here, here and here,' I have a hard time doing that.

Speaking of patience, your name is starting to pop up on lists of hot coaching candidates: How patient are you about getting a chance to be a head coach?

JW: I appreciate you saying that, but to be honest I never have thought that way. I've really not thought that way about moving jobs. I don't spend time getting involved in that part of it. All I really care about, for me, is that we are playing as good as we can play and we are coaching them as good as we can coach them and we're doing whatever is best for us for our team to be successful. That is really all that consumes me. I think once you start worrying about things that are out of your control, you are wasting time. All that drives my professional life is how we are going to play better, how are we going to improve, how are we going to coaching them better, how are we going to teach them better, how can we practice better.