ESPN College Football

Our countdown of the Pac-12's top 25 players continues.

You can see the final post-2010 top 25 here. It doesn't, however, include players from Colorado or Utah.

8. Juron Criner, WR, Arizona

2010 numbers: Criner led the Pac-10 in receptions (82) and receiving yards (1,233), and ranked second with 11 touchdown receptions. His yardage total ranked ninth in the nation.

2010 ranking: No. 6

Making the case for Criner: Criner earned first-team All-Pac-10 honors in 2010 and was clearly the conference's No. 1 receiver. He's received preseason All-American attention and is on the watch list for the Biletnikoff Award, given annually to the nation's top receiver. The 6-foot-4, 215 pounder's 94.8 receiving yards per game was 10 more than anyone else in the conference last fall. He has 20 TD receptions over the past two seasons. He improved substantially from his sophomore to his junior season. Will he do the same as a senior? If he does, he will earn plenty of post-season honors and bolster his NFL draft status. Two potential questions, though: 1. The Wildcats depth at receiver, as well as opponents focusing more on Criner, might cause his numbers to slip, or at least not go up; 2. There was a brief hullabaloo this summer when there were questions whether or not Criner would play this season, due to a family issue. One hopes that won't come into play again, but it is out there as a potential concern.

9. Cliff Harris, CB, Oregon
10. Jonathan Martin, OT, Stanford
11. Shayne Skov, LB, Stanford
12. T.J. McDonald, S, USC
13. Alameda Ta'amu, DT, Washington
14. Matt Kalil, OT, USC
15. Delano Howell, S, Stanford
16. Mychal Kendricks, LB, California
17. Rodney Stewart, RB, Colorado
18. Jermaine Kearse, WR, Washington
19. Chase Thomas, LB, Stanford
20. Jeff Tuel, QB, Washington State
21. Robert Woods, WR, USC
22. Johnathan Franklin, RB, UCLA
23. David Paulson, TE, Oregon
24. David DeCastro, OG, Stanford
25. Marquess Wilson, WR, Washington State

You might not be an Arizona fan, but this is good news: Wildcats receiver Juron Criner, a potential All-American, apparently is ready to go for the 2011 season, according to a report from the Arizona Daily Star.

Coach Mike Stoops told the newspaper Monday: "We anticipate having Juron. He had some family issues that were concerning over the summer, and those are personal. We anticipate him being the same player -- or a better player -- than he was a year ago."

You might recall vague reports at the end of June about Criner's health, which inspired all sorts of rumor. The situation, never formally defined by Criner or the school, was serious enough for Criner to cancel a scheduled trip East to the ESPN studios. A source with knowledge of the situation told ESPN.com that Criner was dealing with a "non-injury, medical issue."

And it was serious enough that it could have endangered Criner's season.

But, apparently, this crisis has been averted, which is a good thing for everyone.

Criner, first-team All-Pac-10 in 2010, is one of the best players in the conference and is a leading Biletnikoff Award candidate. He led the conference in receptions (82) and receiving yards (1,233) while scoring 11 touchdowns.

We can now return to our regularly schedule hyping of the Arizona passing attack.

Bowl games are rewards for successful seasons. At least that's the theory.

But what if you lose your bowl game? What does that say about that so-called successful season?

It's hard to call a bowl game a "must-win" because it's really not -- rarely does a bowl, for example, determine a coach's fate. But it seems reasonable to measure the four Pac-10 bowl games in terms of "need to win."

So this is the third in our series rating how much each of the conference bowl teams needs to win its bowl game. You can review the first entry here and the second one here. We're working our way up from the bottom, so this No. 3.

Valero Alamo Bowl, Dec. 29, 9:15 p.m. ET (ESPN)
Oklahoma State Cowboys (10-2) vs. Arizona Wildcats (7-5)

The set up: Arizona will arrive in San Antonio lugging along a four-game losing streak that ruined a 7-1 start. Oklahoma State will arrive with one of the best offenses in the nation, but it's probably still smarting from a nailbiting 47-41 loss to rival Oklahoma that cost the Cowboys a top-10 ranking and shot at a BCS bowl game. The Cowboys boast perhaps the best offensive skill position troika in the nation in Biletnikoff Award winning receiver Justin Blackmon and a pair of All-Big 12 first-teamers in quarterback Brandon Weeden and running back Kendall Hunter. The Wildcats defense, meanwhile, struggled down the stretch, particularly against the run. On the plus side for Arizona, the Cowboys defense, while improved, is vulnerable, particularly against the pass. It gave up 540 yards to Nebraska, including 323 yards passing, and 588 yards to Oklahoma, including 468 yards passing. Arizona quarterback Nick Foles could be in for a big evening. Oh, and Cowboys fans aren't too fond of Stoops brothers. While they won't be able to knock over Bob Stoops this year, they'd surely enjoy doing it to Mike Stoops, whom they remember from his Sooners days.

Why Arizona needs to win: It's simple: The Wildcats don't want to carry a five-game losing streak into the offseason. How can a team view a season as successful when it's capped by a five-game losing streak, no matter how tough the competition? It's certainly not a burden Mike Stoops wants to carry into the offseason. Stoops got off the hot seat in 2008, but there are more than a few Wildcats fans who will start grumbling anew about a final 7-6 record that includes a five-game losing streak AND a loss at home to archrival Arizona State. Further, when the Wildcats are winning, Stoops' hyperactive presence on the sidelines is mostly viewed as amusing or perhaps just an quasi-admirable showcase of unbridled intensity. Yet when they are losing, Stoops' sideline behavior seems to become a bigger issue. If the Wildcats can beat a highly ranked team in a bowl game and win eight games for a third consecutive year, the season likely would be viewed as a moderate success, as another building block as the Wildcats try to take another step forward as a program. If they lose, the season will feel like a step backward.

Why just getting there is enough: Let's be practical: It's hard to win consistently at Arizona, which still puts basketball first. Stoops has built a winning program that has remained competitive in the top half of the Pac-10 for three consecutive years. Further, the Wildcats are substantial underdogs to a highly ranked team that only lost two close games to highly ranked teams, Nebraska and Oklahoma. How can a team be playing a "need-to-win" game when it's nearly a touchdown underdog? And say whatever you want about the season-ending losing streak, but there are five other Pac-10 teams -- including the Sun Devils -- that would gladly switch places with the Wildcats, who are playing in the Pac-10's "No. 1" non-BCS bowl game for a second consecutive season. Arizona fans should be more attuned to making Stoops happy and keeping him in Tucson than criticizing his sideline behavior or putting him on a "hot seat" for not taking another step forward.

Conclusion: These are both reasonable arguments. A five-game losing streak is a terrible way to end a season, but a berth in the Alamo Bowl can hardly be described as a poor season in Tucson. But since when does reasonable apply in college football? If Arizona loses the Alamo Bow, particularly if it gets whipped, it will be a long offseason in Tucson. And more than a handful of pundits will speculate that Stoops needs to produce better results or he will return to the hot seat in 2011.

Needs to win meter (scale of 1 to 10, "10" being a must-win): 7

The Biletnikoff Award, presented annually to the nation's outstanding college football receiver, has announced its watch list and it includes six Pac-10 players:

Juron Criner, Arizona
Ronald Johnson, USC
Marvin Jones, California
Jermaine Kearse, Washington
James Rodgers, Oregon State
Ryan Whalen, Stanford

Ten semifinalists will be announced on Nov. 15. Three finalists will be chosen on Nov. 22. The winner will be announced live on ESPN on The Home Depot ESPNU College Football Awards on Dec. 9.

Wanted to hit the notes that were neglected during my week of vacation.

Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/ESPN_Pac10

Troy from Portland writes: One thing I have struggled with is why OSU seems unattractive to the high end receivers. Is it just the locale? After the success of 2000, and the receiver that shall not be named, my assumption was OSU showed itself as a destination that could showcase a talent with its system.

Ted Miller: You are right. Oregon State hasn't had any good receivers since Chad Johnson and T.J. Houshmandzadeh teamed up in 2000.

Other than James Newson (first-team All-Pac-10 in 2003). Or Mike Hass (two-time first-team All-Pac-10 and the 2005 Biletnikoff Award winner as the nation's best receiver). Or Sammie Stroughter (first-team All-Pac-10 in 2008). Or this James Rodgers guy (first-team All-Pac-10 in 2009).

Do you FEEL my sarcasm spewing through your computer screen?

In fact, seeing that the Beavers have seven times produced a first- or second-team All-Pac-10 receiver over the past 10 seasons, you might ACTUALLY say that no other Pac-10 program -- other than USC -- even approaches Oregon State's success producing elite, productive receivers over the past decade.

Now, if you are talking about recruiting rankings, perhaps you are correct. Plenty of other programs have been able to attract 18-star recruits who went on to find comfortable spots on the bench where they could, presumably, read about those lowly 1/2-star recruits for the Beavers catching a bunch of passes and earning postseason honors.

Eric from Arizona writes: You are killing me. Even in most other Pac-10 teams' "worst case" scenarios they beat the Sun Devils. I am not optimistic about the Devils this year, but come on. You don't even give us a shot when the other team's wheels fall off? Worst case, a demoralized Huskies team still beat ASU with a backup quarterback no one has heard of? Is ASU that bad? Have we been bad neighbors? Are you mad about the immigration law? Are you frustrated with the 115 degree temps? What have we done to deserve this?

Ted Miller: Yes, I am frustrated with the 115 degree temps. You folks are great neighbors. I don't do politics on the Pac-10 blog.

Look, I hear you. One of the challenges of doing these "best and worst case" pieces is making sure all the dots connect. And there's also the "collateral damage" of teams that serve as sacrificial lambs in the worst-case scenarios.

The reason Arizona State loses to Washington in the Huskies' "worst case" is twofold: 1. I have picked Arizona State to finish ninth in the conference, so it makes sense based on my media poll vote that it will take it on the chin a few times; 2. It would be far more galling for Huskies fans to lost to Washington State than Arizona State.

As for how "bad" the Sun Devils are, it's more a case of the conference's depth. I see ASU as team that should be competitive in just about every game it plays, and I certainly wouldn't be shocked if the Sun Devils ended up in a bowl game.

Morgan from Los Angeles writes: I follow college football recruiting pretty religiously and recently I have found myself confused at how USC is not seeming to be affected by its scholarship restriction. According to most recruiting Web sites, they already have close to 10 commits for the class of 2011, but have many, many other offers out there for top prospects. How can this be? If even 1/4 of the other recruits that they have offered accept the scholarships, it seems as though they would be over their limit given the sanctions they are operating under. When the sanctions came down, I thought they would be forced to be much more selective and possibly even retract some offers for prospects in this class. Can you help me understand?

Ted Miller: USC is appealing its NCAA sanctions, therefore its 2011 recruiting class won't be limited. You should expect the Trojans to do everything they can to stock up this go-round.

And top prospects will continue to look seriously at USC even when the sanctions do hit. Why? Because USC remains USC: It's an NFL factory and one of the premier programs in the country.

Peter from Palo Alto, Calif., writes: How is Rose Bowl selection affected by the bowl-ineligibility of USC. If USC wins the PAC-10 and is disqualified, does the Rose Bowl have to take the second place PAC-10 team? Or is the Rose Bowl free to select whomever they like from other conferences?

Ted Miller: Here's how it goes this season: USC won't win the Pac-10, even if it does. So the conference actually functions as a nine-team league this season (and if USC loses its appeal, it also won't be eligible in 2011). The top team from that nine will go to the Rose Bowl.

Unless, of course, that team is selected for the national title game. At that point, there is a new BCS rule you may want to be aware of: "For the games in January 2011 through 2014, the first year the Rose Bowl loses a team to the [national championship game] and a team from the non-AQ group is an automatic qualifier, that non-AQ team will play in the Rose Bowl."

So, say, undefeated Stanford is selected to play Alabama in the national title game on Jan. 10 in University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Ariz. That wouldn't mean that the next team in the Pac-10 standings would become the Rose Bowl representative -- the slot would go to a non-AQ team.

Jason from Emeryville, Calif., writes: Where do you feel the Pac 10 championship game should be played, and where do you think it will end up being played in the future?

Ted Miller: I think the best course is to allow the No. 1 seed to host the game.

The wisdom there is twofold: 1. Giving the No. 1 seed an advantage is both fair and better for the conference's national title prospects; 2. The game is far more likely to sell out than if it were at a neutral site.

On the downside, not knowing where the game will be played in advance of the season makes it harder to plan, both for the Pac-10 (which wants to make the championship game an "event") and for any broadcast partners. Moreover, it wouldn't be ideal if the game ended up in Pullman or Corvallis.

But based on what we've seen so far out of commissioner Larry Scott, I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't have a grand plan, which might include giving the game a permanent home -- perhaps University of Phoenix Stadium -- or rotating the game among major Pac-10 cities.

Damon from Tucson writes: I just read your Best case-worst case: Arizona and it all sounds pretty good, but in the worst case part you talk about UA and ASU both being 5-6. You say that each needs to win the game in order to become bowl eligible. This is correct for Arizona however if you are counting ASU's wins against Portland State and NAU then you must know that a school can only count one win against FCS opponents toward bowl eligibility, so ASU must be 7-5 at the end of the year to play in a bowl. Just thought I would point that out.

Ted Miller: You are correct. My bad. Arizona State, because it plays two FCS foes this season, needs to finish 7-5 to become bowl-eligible.

Brandon from Davenport, Iowa writes: Your "worst case scenario" for Arizona is losing to Iowa by less than two touchdowns?!? Seems to me that is more of a best-case scenario. Arizona lost too much talent to beat Iowa with the defense that they have this season.

Ted Miller: Hmm. Got a couple of notes like this. Iowa fans seem really confident.

We shall see.

Bryan from Berkeley, Calif., writes: Like you I have had a great time laughing at [former Arizona State receiver] Isaiah Mustafa's Old Spice ads and was wondering if you have seen his new video responses to twitter and fan mail. Thought you might enjoy it. This new level of ridiculousness can be seen in this link.

Ted Miller: If that doesn't make you laugh, you are probably dead.

Our countdown of the Pac-10's top 25 players continues.

No. 6. James Rodgers, WR, Oregon State

2009 numbers: The 5-foot-7, 188-pound senior ranked seventh in the nation and No. 1 in the Pac-10 in all-purpose yards with 179.1 yards per game. He led the Pac-10 with 1,034 yards receiving and 91 receptions with nine touchdowns. He also rushed for 346 yards and ranked third in the conference with an average of 11.6 yards per punt return.

Most recent ranking: Rodgers was ranked ninth in our final Pac-10 top-30 list last year.

Making the case for Rodgers: Despite his size, Rodgers, a Beavers co-captain, is the best returning receiver in the conference. But just mentioning that he was first-team All-Pac-10 at the position in 2009 does not sufficiently tell his story. Simply, Rodgers is an offensive weapon who can stress a defense in myriad ways as a runner, receiver or return man. As a freshman and sophomore -- Rodgers has started 27 career games -- he was a fly sweep specialist. Last year, he became an elite receiver. His 91 receptions broke the school single-season record and he enters 2010 with 161 career receptions, which presently ranks third all-time at Oregon State and is just 60 short of the school record held by 2005 Biletnikoff Award recipient Mike Hass (2002-05) at 220. His 1,849 career receiving yards ranks sixth on the school list; his 14 career receiving touchdowns is tied for seventh; and his six career 100-yard-plus receiving games is tied for sixth. Phil Steele named him a preseason third-team All-American and he was first-team for NationalChamps.net.

No. 7. Rahim Moore, S, UCLA
No. 8. Akeem Ayers, LB, UCLA
No. 9. Mike Mohamed, LB, California
No. 10. Trevin Wade, CB, Arizona
No. 11. Mason Foster, LB, Washington
No. 12. Ricky Elmore, DE, Arizona
No. 13. Kenny Rowe, DE, Oregon
No. 14. Jurrell Casey, DT, USC
No. 15. Cameron Jordan, DE, California
No. 16. Nick Foles, QB, Arizona
No. 17. Vontaze Burfict, LB, Arizona State
No. 18: Colin Baxter, C, Arizona
No. 19: Chase Beeler, C, Stanford
No. 20. Lawrence Guy, DT, Arizona State
No. 21. Matt Barkley, QB, USC
No. 22. Owen Marecic, LB/FB, Stanford
No. 23. Kristofer O'Dowd, C, USC
No. 24: Casey Matthews, LB, Oregon
No. 25 Kai Forbath, K, UCLA