Pac-12: Florida State Seminoles
In advance, I hope everyone has a safe and enjoyable Memorial Day weekend. Please, remember to take a moment to think about what it's all about.
And then have a great cook out.
You can follow me on Twitter.
To the notes.
Scott from Honolulu writes: My question is with rumors of Florida St. talking with the Big 12 and the new college football playoffs being put into place in the near future, do you foresee another round of conference realignment? And if so, what are possible schools could we see in this new Pac 12, 14, 16 or whatever numerically correct conference?
Ted Miller: Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott has long held that further contraction in college football is inevitable. As you know, he's the all-knowing Dr. Strange of college football. And I agree with Scott. I used to think we'd reduce the FBS field to about 60 teams, and that crew would break away from the NCAA and form its own governing body. Now I think it might end up being an even smaller number.
First, so far there's been a lot of smoke (chatter) with little fire (an actual move) as it pertains to ACC teams with wandering eyes. Further, emotionally, I don't know how I feel about the notion of college football reducing itself to four super-conferences. Part of me winces, but I'm not sure if that's just my age showing. More than a few of you think my affection for the Rose Bowl is dated. When I hear such talk, I always see the baffled reaction of another sportswriter when I say, "But I'd really rather not eat at Applebee's."
On a Machiavellian level, I think the Pac-12 presidents made a mistake when they blew off Oklahoma, Texas, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech last September. While Scott won't say this on the record, my feeling from talking to him these past three or so years is he agrees. The Pac-12 had an opportunity to become the Pac-16, the first superconference, and thereby guarantee itself the most powerful seat at the table when the new look of college football is hashed out this summer.
Said Scott at the time, while defending the decision to remain at 12: "An opportunity was turned down that could have generated more money for the schools but potentially could have torn apart the fabric of the culture of the conference."
Culture, you might have noticed, is losing its traction during college football's money grab.
That move, of course, would have torn the Big 12 asunder. By the Pac-12 not doing so, the Big 12 was allowed to regroup and now it is threatening to do that very thing to the ACC. Yeah, all is fair in love, war and conference realignment.
And where does the Pac-12 turn if the SEC and Big 12 were to split up the prime teams of the ACC? Hard to say. Texas has always been the big prize in that it offered a huge market, a stellar sports program and strong academics. But that bull has walked, so to speak, and there are few teams within, oh, 1,500 miles of Pac-12 country that make much sense for expansion. Or that aren't spoken for.
The number that makes the most sense is 16. That's why few believe the SEC will stay at 14. But which four programs could add value to the Pac-12? The pickings are slim, unless Scott tries to raid the Big 12, which at present is surging and unified, or he gets really creative, outmaneuvers the Big Ten, grabs Notre Dame and uses that coup to go national and lures three more teams from outside the West region.
As it stands, I don't see an ideal 16-team scenario for the Pac-12, though I don't have one of those all-knowing Dr. Strange brains like Scott and Chip Kelly do.
Michael from Seattle writes: Do you buy into the hype of Desmond Trufant? I've seen him in a "top 100 players headed into 2012" list and I was fairly shocked. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see him having a monster senior year. Thoughts?
Ted Miller: Trufant is an NFL prospect. He's going to be a four-year starter for Washington. He's got good measurables -- 6-0, 185, good speed -- and good bloodlines being the younger brother of NFL cornerback Marcus Trufant. He was honorable mention All-Pac-12 last year, so at least two Pac-12 coaches think he can play.
But, yes, there have been a few times when he's been notably beaten. I'm aware that some Huskies fans are doubters. I also think NFL draft projections before a player's final year are fluid and often uniformed. Guys who appear in the first round of mock drafts in the summer often disappear by the following spring. And other players on nobodies' mock draft radar soar into the early rounds.
My feeling is Trufant has plenty to prove. I also think it's hard to measure him because the Huskies have been so awful on defense. It's difficult to be a good cornerback behind a weak pass rush. Or when you're consistently left on an island because the defensive coordinator is consistently rushing six or seven because of that weak pass rush.
I think the Huskies defense will be much better under new coordinator Justin Wilcox. And that will make Trufant look more like an NFL corner.
Kym from Los Angeles writes: Which redshirt freshman will have the biggest impact this season?
Ted Miller: If he wins the starting QB job, Michael Eubank at Arizona State would be a good guess. Same with QB Brett Hundley at UCLA.
California really needs Maurice Harris to step up at receiver. Utah has a redshirt freshman No. 1 at right offensive tackle after spring practices: Daniel Nielson. USC has several redshirt freshmen on its D-line -- Antwaun Woods, Cody Temple, Christian Heyward and Greg Townsend -- who could really help if they stepped up.
This will be a better question -- or at least one that's easier to answer -- when we get a solid idea of depth charts in mid-to-late August.
Tim from Salt Lake City writes: Why is it that, though I've seen them mentioned as a possible pre-season top 25 more than once, Utah hasn't warranted so much as an honorable mention in any of the offseason lists? As you are fond of asking us, who would you exclude in their favor?
Ted Miller: Barring any major, presently unforeseen issues, Utah will be in my preseason top-25 vote for the ESPN.com.
Here's Mark Schlabach's most recent top-25. I think you could clip the team that the Utes beat in the Sun Bowl and thereby find a spot.
Michael from Stockton, Calif., writes: Will oregon really be that big of threat to the explosive and very talented USC?
Ted Miller: Yes.
Steve from Fort Myers, Fla., writes: A while back you made a list of places to eat in the Pac 12 cities, this summer I will be traveling to Seattle, Corvallis, and Eugene. I was hoping you could either email me the list, or tell me where to find it, so I can check them out?
Ted Miller: If you click here, it will magically appear.
And if you read some of the comments below, you undoubtedly will find more options.
And then have a great cook out.
You can follow me on Twitter.
To the notes.
Scott from Honolulu writes: My question is with rumors of Florida St. talking with the Big 12 and the new college football playoffs being put into place in the near future, do you foresee another round of conference realignment? And if so, what are possible schools could we see in this new Pac 12, 14, 16 or whatever numerically correct conference?
Ted Miller: Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott has long held that further contraction in college football is inevitable. As you know, he's the all-knowing Dr. Strange of college football. And I agree with Scott. I used to think we'd reduce the FBS field to about 60 teams, and that crew would break away from the NCAA and form its own governing body. Now I think it might end up being an even smaller number.
First, so far there's been a lot of smoke (chatter) with little fire (an actual move) as it pertains to ACC teams with wandering eyes. Further, emotionally, I don't know how I feel about the notion of college football reducing itself to four super-conferences. Part of me winces, but I'm not sure if that's just my age showing. More than a few of you think my affection for the Rose Bowl is dated. When I hear such talk, I always see the baffled reaction of another sportswriter when I say, "But I'd really rather not eat at Applebee's."
On a Machiavellian level, I think the Pac-12 presidents made a mistake when they blew off Oklahoma, Texas, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech last September. While Scott won't say this on the record, my feeling from talking to him these past three or so years is he agrees. The Pac-12 had an opportunity to become the Pac-16, the first superconference, and thereby guarantee itself the most powerful seat at the table when the new look of college football is hashed out this summer.
Said Scott at the time, while defending the decision to remain at 12: "An opportunity was turned down that could have generated more money for the schools but potentially could have torn apart the fabric of the culture of the conference."
Culture, you might have noticed, is losing its traction during college football's money grab.
That move, of course, would have torn the Big 12 asunder. By the Pac-12 not doing so, the Big 12 was allowed to regroup and now it is threatening to do that very thing to the ACC. Yeah, all is fair in love, war and conference realignment.
And where does the Pac-12 turn if the SEC and Big 12 were to split up the prime teams of the ACC? Hard to say. Texas has always been the big prize in that it offered a huge market, a stellar sports program and strong academics. But that bull has walked, so to speak, and there are few teams within, oh, 1,500 miles of Pac-12 country that make much sense for expansion. Or that aren't spoken for.
The number that makes the most sense is 16. That's why few believe the SEC will stay at 14. But which four programs could add value to the Pac-12? The pickings are slim, unless Scott tries to raid the Big 12, which at present is surging and unified, or he gets really creative, outmaneuvers the Big Ten, grabs Notre Dame and uses that coup to go national and lures three more teams from outside the West region.
As it stands, I don't see an ideal 16-team scenario for the Pac-12, though I don't have one of those all-knowing Dr. Strange brains like Scott and Chip Kelly do.
Michael from Seattle writes: Do you buy into the hype of Desmond Trufant? I've seen him in a "top 100 players headed into 2012" list and I was fairly shocked. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see him having a monster senior year. Thoughts?
Ted Miller: Trufant is an NFL prospect. He's going to be a four-year starter for Washington. He's got good measurables -- 6-0, 185, good speed -- and good bloodlines being the younger brother of NFL cornerback Marcus Trufant. He was honorable mention All-Pac-12 last year, so at least two Pac-12 coaches think he can play.
But, yes, there have been a few times when he's been notably beaten. I'm aware that some Huskies fans are doubters. I also think NFL draft projections before a player's final year are fluid and often uniformed. Guys who appear in the first round of mock drafts in the summer often disappear by the following spring. And other players on nobodies' mock draft radar soar into the early rounds.
My feeling is Trufant has plenty to prove. I also think it's hard to measure him because the Huskies have been so awful on defense. It's difficult to be a good cornerback behind a weak pass rush. Or when you're consistently left on an island because the defensive coordinator is consistently rushing six or seven because of that weak pass rush.
I think the Huskies defense will be much better under new coordinator Justin Wilcox. And that will make Trufant look more like an NFL corner.
Kym from Los Angeles writes: Which redshirt freshman will have the biggest impact this season?
Ted Miller: If he wins the starting QB job, Michael Eubank at Arizona State would be a good guess. Same with QB Brett Hundley at UCLA.
California really needs Maurice Harris to step up at receiver. Utah has a redshirt freshman No. 1 at right offensive tackle after spring practices: Daniel Nielson. USC has several redshirt freshmen on its D-line -- Antwaun Woods, Cody Temple, Christian Heyward and Greg Townsend -- who could really help if they stepped up.
This will be a better question -- or at least one that's easier to answer -- when we get a solid idea of depth charts in mid-to-late August.
Tim from Salt Lake City writes: Why is it that, though I've seen them mentioned as a possible pre-season top 25 more than once, Utah hasn't warranted so much as an honorable mention in any of the offseason lists? As you are fond of asking us, who would you exclude in their favor?
Ted Miller: Barring any major, presently unforeseen issues, Utah will be in my preseason top-25 vote for the ESPN.com.
Here's Mark Schlabach's most recent top-25. I think you could clip the team that the Utes beat in the Sun Bowl and thereby find a spot.
Michael from Stockton, Calif., writes: Will oregon really be that big of threat to the explosive and very talented USC?
Ted Miller: Yes.
Steve from Fort Myers, Fla., writes: A while back you made a list of places to eat in the Pac 12 cities, this summer I will be traveling to Seattle, Corvallis, and Eugene. I was hoping you could either email me the list, or tell me where to find it, so I can check them out?
Ted Miller: If you click here, it will magically appear.
And if you read some of the comments below, you undoubtedly will find more options.
Early today we looked at some of the early Heisman odds. Now we're looking at the BCS title odds.
ESPN's Will Harris took the odds of a top British sports book and broke down the favorites, the contenders and the long shots.
As you'd expect, USC and Oregon are toward the top of the odds, with the Trojans coming in at 8-1 and Oregon at 10-1.
LSU comes in as the favorite at 4.5 to 1. Though they aren't a heavy favorite, with Alabama close behind at 5 to 1. USC and Oregon come in at Nos. 3 and 4 respectively, followed by Oklahoma, Florida State and Georgia all at 12 to 1.
ESPN's Will Harris took the odds of a top British sports book and broke down the favorites, the contenders and the long shots.
As you'd expect, USC and Oregon are toward the top of the odds, with the Trojans coming in at 8-1 and Oregon at 10-1.
Harris on USC:
USC isn't a top-three pick, either. Matt Barkley is back, the bowl ban is over and the Trojans are feeling good. But this is still a young team with overall depth issues and an inexperienced coach. Lane Kiffin has flashed an intriguing skill set, but we need to be holding more proven coaching to bite at 8 to 1.
LSU comes in as the favorite at 4.5 to 1. Though they aren't a heavy favorite, with Alabama close behind at 5 to 1. USC and Oregon come in at Nos. 3 and 4 respectively, followed by Oklahoma, Florida State and Georgia all at 12 to 1.
ESPN The Magazine and RecruitingNation compiled the past five years (2007-11) of ESPNU 150 rankings and then crowned college football's top 10 recruiting programs.
Here's how they did it:
Here's the top-10.
1. Florida
2. Texas
3. USC
4. Alabama
5. Florida State
6. Notre Dame
T-7. Georgia
t-7: LSU
9. Miami
T-10. Ohio State
T-10. Oklahoma
Here's what it says about USC:
(USC actually signed three out-of-state recruits, including receiver Nelson Agholor and DT Leonard Williams, who are both from Florida).
What's clear from this list: Sometimes teams with lots of ESPNU 150 players produce on the field (Alabama, LSU, Oklahoma, Ohio State) and sometimes they do not (Florida, Texas, Florida State, Notre Dame and Miami).
Florida is 15-11 over the past two seasons, when these highly rated classes should have been peaking. Texas is 13-12 over the same span. Miami has lost fewer than six games just once since 2007. Notre Dame's best years came the past two seasons -- both 8-5. Florida State has averaged 4.8 losses since 2007. Georgia was 10-4 this season, but it was a combined 14-12 in 2009 and 2010. Ohio State probably can be forgiven its 6-7 finish this year, based on the NCAA issues and firing of coach Jim Tressel. Oklahoma's lone blip was an 8-5 campaign in 2009. USC's "downturn" came in 2009 and 2010 when the Trojans went 17-9.
Conclusions?
Well, it's possible that Florida recruiting -- as good as it is -- is overrated. Perhaps the same can be said for Texas. Or at least these four programs -- Florida, Florida State, Miami and Texas -- aren't doing the best job of evaluating their wealth of in-state talent.
Here's how they did it:
Our methodology was simple: We re-tallied the scores following signing day and ranked the schools based on total number of ESPNU 150 recruits (there have been 900) hauled in over the last six years. Of course, like success on the field, recruiting is cyclical -- and fans of programs both on and off this list might look back on Feb. 1, 2012 as the day their team began its rise (or fall) on the trail.
Here's the top-10.
1. Florida
2. Texas
3. USC
4. Alabama
5. Florida State
6. Notre Dame
T-7. Georgia
t-7: LSU
9. Miami
T-10. Ohio State
T-10. Oklahoma
Here's what it says about USC:
Top states: California (36), Florida (six), Arizona (four)
Surprise state: Georgia (three)
Sure, the Trojans have California locked up. But USC has also signed four of Arizona's 12 ESPNU 150 prospects and Georgia's second-best preps in 2008 (WR Brice Butler of Norcross) and 2010 (WR Markeith Ambles of McDonough). In 2012, USC signed seven ESPNU 150 commits -- OT Zach Banner (Lakewood, Wash.) was the lone out-of-state recruit.
(USC actually signed three out-of-state recruits, including receiver Nelson Agholor and DT Leonard Williams, who are both from Florida).
What's clear from this list: Sometimes teams with lots of ESPNU 150 players produce on the field (Alabama, LSU, Oklahoma, Ohio State) and sometimes they do not (Florida, Texas, Florida State, Notre Dame and Miami).
Florida is 15-11 over the past two seasons, when these highly rated classes should have been peaking. Texas is 13-12 over the same span. Miami has lost fewer than six games just once since 2007. Notre Dame's best years came the past two seasons -- both 8-5. Florida State has averaged 4.8 losses since 2007. Georgia was 10-4 this season, but it was a combined 14-12 in 2009 and 2010. Ohio State probably can be forgiven its 6-7 finish this year, based on the NCAA issues and firing of coach Jim Tressel. Oklahoma's lone blip was an 8-5 campaign in 2009. USC's "downturn" came in 2009 and 2010 when the Trojans went 17-9.
Conclusions?
Well, it's possible that Florida recruiting -- as good as it is -- is overrated. Perhaps the same can be said for Texas. Or at least these four programs -- Florida, Florida State, Miami and Texas -- aren't doing the best job of evaluating their wealth of in-state talent.
Receiver Nelson Agholor (Berkley Prep, Tampa, Fla.) has announced he will sign with USC.
Agholor, 6-foot-1, 180 pounds, the nation's No. 6 receiver and No. 47 overall on the ESPNU 150, picked the Trojans over Florida, Florida State, Oklahoma and Notre Dame.
Phil Steele has projected how he believes the AP top-10 will look next August, and his vision includes a pair of Pac-12 teams.
He projects the top-10 going like this: 1. LSU; 2. USC; 3. Alabama; 4. Oregon; 5. Oklahoma; 6. Georgia; 7. Michigan; 8. Florida State; 9. Arkansas; 10. West Virginia.
Here's what he writes about Oregon:
And USC:
This isn't how Steele projects the top-10, just how he believes the AP will see things.
He projects the top-10 going like this: 1. LSU; 2. USC; 3. Alabama; 4. Oregon; 5. Oklahoma; 6. Georgia; 7. Michigan; 8. Florida State; 9. Arkansas; 10. West Virginia.
Here's what he writes about Oregon:
The Ducks have become a fixture among the nation’s elite under HC Chip Kelly with 3 straight BCS appearances and last year captured their first Rose Bowl win since 1916! While QB Darron Thomas and RB LaMichael James are gone, their replacements are plenty capable as QB Bryan Bennett and RB’s Kenjon Barner and De’Anthony Thomas return with some valuable game experience and the Ducks do not open with a marquee non-conference game like they did last year vs LSU.
And USC:
Last year while the probation-stricken Trojans were not eligible to play in the Pac-12 title game, I picked them to be the best team in the South and clearly they were just that going 10-2 (7-2) beating their crosstown rival Bruins who were the de facto Pac-12 South Champs 50-0 in the regular season finale! The Trojans locked up their spot here with the surprising return of QB Matt Barkley who is clearly one of the Heisman favorites in 2012. He will have plenty of skill position talent surrounding him with his top 2 WR’s Robert Woods and Marqise Lee back and 1,000 yd rusher Curtis McNeal also returning. A case could be made at the end of last season that no team in the country was hotter than USC winning 7 of their last 8 games with a 3OT loss to Stanford their only blemish. With 15 returning starters, the Trojans clearly will be one of the favorites to take home the crystal ball.
This isn't how Steele projects the top-10, just how he believes the AP will see things.
Utah's impressive comeback over Georgia Tech in the Sun Bowl wasn't the only news that fired up the mailbag on New Year's Eve.
It appears that Utah may not only drop its drum and feather logo, it also may drop its mascot -- "Utes" -- entirely.
A couple from the mailbag.
To me, this is more of an issue for Utah fans and less for those who try to cover the team objectively. Moreover, I am new to covering Utah, so I'm not steeped in Utah's traditions. I don't know the depth of attachment to the drum logo.
This is about an institution and its supporters. If fans go nuts about potential changes, they are less likely to happen.
But if you want my gut reaction: The logo is one thing. The mascot is another entirely.
If Utah is no longer going to be the Utes -- a name that has the stamp of approval from the actual Utes -- then will you rename the state next? Utah becomes Wasatch? Or Utactooy? My suggestion: South Park.
And, by the way, I am PC. I can't believe a team in the 21st century is called the "Washington Redskins." Is it the social issue that most keeps me up at night? No. But my opinion, if anybody was curious, is the NFL team in Washington, D.C. should have a different mascot.
But I think the respectful relationship Florida State has with the Seminole Tribe of Florida -- which got the stamp of approval from the NCAA -- feels similar to what Utah has with the Ute Tribal Council. Much of the offense that is conjured up comes from people who spend a lot of time being offended without actually having a real-life grounds for taking offense.
And, yes, while I have no direct knowledge of Pac-12 pressure here, I would bet that there are plenty of people in other conference schools -- particularly on the academic side of things -- who have issues with Utah being the Utes.
But this will come down to Utah fans. If you bombard the athletic department with demands that Utah remains the Utes -- and important boosters threaten to stop giving money -- then probably nothing will change.
It appears that Utah may not only drop its drum and feather logo, it also may drop its mascot -- "Utes" -- entirely.
A couple from the mailbag.
Colby from Salt Lake City writes: I write to you today to ask you to, given your position as author of the Pac 12 Blog, bring light to the discussion going on around the administrative offices of the University of Utah to drop the drum and feather logo and the nickname "Utes" for fear of political correctness.You may or may not know that a lawsuit was filed by the Ute tribe some years ago and that the University was subsequently given the right and blessing to use the term "Utes" as our nickname. I cannot begin to describe what a disappointment, stab in the back and breaking of tens of thousands of fans hearts changing our logo and name would be, but I don't feel that I have to. I feel it is something just understood by sports fans. Please bring this to attention, and hopefully help us in showing the University that we are proud of our logo, our name and the fact that we represent the native tribe of the Salt Lake valley well, with dignity and respect for what that name means to so many outside of the university's walls.
Dylan from Salt Lake City writes: Utah seems to be dropping the drum and feather logo at the decision of the athletic department. With this and the talks of dropping the Crazy Lady, is it reasonable to think that Utah's move to the Pac-12 is a factor in the reasoning behind these decisions?
To me, this is more of an issue for Utah fans and less for those who try to cover the team objectively. Moreover, I am new to covering Utah, so I'm not steeped in Utah's traditions. I don't know the depth of attachment to the drum logo.
This is about an institution and its supporters. If fans go nuts about potential changes, they are less likely to happen.
But if you want my gut reaction: The logo is one thing. The mascot is another entirely.
If Utah is no longer going to be the Utes -- a name that has the stamp of approval from the actual Utes -- then will you rename the state next? Utah becomes Wasatch? Or Utactooy? My suggestion: South Park.
And, by the way, I am PC. I can't believe a team in the 21st century is called the "Washington Redskins." Is it the social issue that most keeps me up at night? No. But my opinion, if anybody was curious, is the NFL team in Washington, D.C. should have a different mascot.
But I think the respectful relationship Florida State has with the Seminole Tribe of Florida -- which got the stamp of approval from the NCAA -- feels similar to what Utah has with the Ute Tribal Council. Much of the offense that is conjured up comes from people who spend a lot of time being offended without actually having a real-life grounds for taking offense.
And, yes, while I have no direct knowledge of Pac-12 pressure here, I would bet that there are plenty of people in other conference schools -- particularly on the academic side of things -- who have issues with Utah being the Utes.
But this will come down to Utah fans. If you bombard the athletic department with demands that Utah remains the Utes -- and important boosters threaten to stop giving money -- then probably nothing will change.
Happy Friday.
Anyone else eager to end the worst offseason in the history of college football and start talking about games again?
Thought so.
Follow me on Twitter.
To the notes.
Roger from Oregon writes: I am a high school student in Oregon. It has really been bothering me how many columnists are calling out Darron Thomas and his leadership. I know that he has been in the car on three separate occasions were citations, as well as marijuana were involved. How does this make him a bad leader? At my school, a high school not a university, smoking weed is commonplace. While I don't smoke, most of my friends and about 75% of male athletes do, yet they are still able to be leaders on the football field, basketball court, etc. Maybe weed is taboo for all these old journalists, but in my opinion Darron Thomas is a leader (have you seen him stay in the pocket and take a big hit). His toughness and incredible play make him a leader on the field, I honestly don't care how he spends his time off the field (as long as nobody gets hurt).
Ted Miller: Here's the chief problem with marijuana and high-profile people smoking it: It's against the law, so getting caught with it brings bad publicity.
For a sports team, that could mean said team loses a player to suspension, which would make the team worse than before the player passed the dutchie on the left hand side. So players on a team that smoke the wacky weed, put their team at risk of being less good. Some, including me, would call that selfish.
Does it makes sense that one can legally purchase grain alcohol but not marijuana? Do people lose arguments when they are asked to explain why marijuana is illegal? These are questions the Pac-12 blog will not answer because they lead us on tangents away from the football field.
But I will write on leadership. It's more than taking charge of the huddle. It's more than showing infectious poise when the pressure is on. Or popping up with a confident smirk after a hard hit. We've seen all that from Thomas and we surely will see more of it.
But let's imagine a couple of scenarios.
We are in a car with Thomas and safety Eddie Pleasant in 2008. Pleasant decides to race his car with someone. Instead of what actually happened, this happens.
Now we are watching Thomas as he's about to get into a car with cornerback Cliff Harris in June.
Now, if Thomas, however he might have accomplished it, had convinced Harris not to drive 118 mph nor allowed anyone to smoke weed in that car, would Ducks fans be celebrating his leadership?
No, because they wouldn't know about it. This embarrassing story wouldn't exist.
And Oregon's chances of beating LSU and winning a national title would be better.
Nick from San Luis Obispo, Calif., writes: Whats your take on the whole players being paid idea? All the ex coaches were on today saying how its a wonderful idea to give players a cost of living expense of $3,000 to $4,000 depending on the school. They also said that this should only be for sports that bring in the money. (men's football and basketball)My reaction is how is this far? Not all schools can afford to give scholarship athletes extra $ giving the ones who can an unfair advantage in recruiting. Also what about all the other sports? Isn't the whole idea of giving extra money to a athlete is so they can live comfortably? (extra spending money for clothes and other food then the cafe) Why is it that only football and basketball players need extra money?
Ted Miller: I agree with a lot of athletic directors: Scholarships should cover full cost of attendance. And I also believe they should be given to every scholarship athlete. Why? Because you can't do it any other way and still be in compliance with Title IX.
You are correct, though. Most schools outside of AQ conferences would be hard-pressed to pay that added expense. That's an issue.
As for why football and men's basketball players believe they should be paid and other college athletes should not? Well, that reasoning is simple. Football and men's basketball make millions every year. And every other sport runs a deficit, many substantial deficits.
Pat from So. Cal writes: In my effort to get any type of response Teddy I've decided to ask you one question everyday until I make the mailbag. For my SECOND question, on this inaugural day of questioning: do you think the university presidents at the largest, most influential schools, across conferences, will get together at some point and begin the process of detaching themselves from the NCAA??? The system doesn't work and we can all yell until we're red in the face but the simple fact remains, there needs to be some sort of governance going on in college REVENUE PRODUCING SPORTS, and it's clear the NCAA has failed its member institutions and that they aren't the right organization.
Ted Miller: There is an undercurrent of feeling that the big football conferences might break away from the NCAA, particularly when we get further consolidation in "super-conferences," which seems inevitable.
That's one reason the NCAA is talking massive reform. We shall see.
What should the NCAA do? Here are a few ideas:
Ben from Salt Lake City writes: Can we think about a possible future for a minute? Let's pretend that Utah somehow goes undefeated this year and wins the BCS National Championship game. Then let's assume that next year, both Utah and TCU go undefeated and play each other in the BCS National Championship game. If that ridiculously crazy scenario were to happen, do you think that the media that clings to the idea that the "week in and week out of Non-AQ's is too weak to get them to the NC Game" would go out the window? Do you think it would validate other top Non-AQ teams that have proven themselves like Boise State or BYU? Or do you think that the 100+ year old bias of college football is protected no matter what happens?
Ted Miller: Are you asking if a pattern is established of non-AQ teams going undefeated and winning national championships, will that win over the media?
Yes.
That said: This is Boise State's schedule. This is LSU's schedule.
Anyone saying that an unbeaten Boise State team in 2011 should play for the national championship over a once-beaten LSU team would -- and should -- get laughed out of the room.
Let's not give Boise State or TCU a free pass, either. Both programs are outstanding and worthy of elite rankings, but they also both work the angles to manufacture great records. Neither has adopted the old Bobby Bowden at Florida State "anywhere, anytime" scheduling philosophy.
If either said "we'll go anywhere to play and won't insist on a home-and-home series," we'd see them be able to schedule two or three high-quality games with AQ conferences foes every year.
And, I suspect, we'd see fewer undefeated seasons.
By the way, Utah is now a member of the Pac-12 family. It's in the club, drinking single malt in the beach-front penthouse with UCLA Oregon, Stanford and the rest of the gang.
Rob from San Jose writes: I am wondering how I missed your Post-spring Power Rankings. I thought for sure Cal would be ahead of UCLA; Cal beat UCLA in 2010 and it was not close. Cal has a proven defense (even with three good starters gone), but you think UCLA's defense "will arrive". Could you do a pre-season opener power rankings to see what has changed. ASU has had some bad luck with injuries and some schools have had academic ineligibility concerns. Since Cal's Maynard is QB, Sofele and Deboskie-Johnson have established 1-2 at RB; I am wondering where Cal would rank now?
Ted Miller: And UCLA beat Oregon State, which beat Cal 35-7. Those same Beavers also beat USC 36-7 and USC beat Cal 48-14.
So Cal gets crushed by UCLA if you selectively use the transitive property.
I got to watch UCLA practice this spring and came away impressed, at least with the defense. Cal had closed practices, so I didn't get to see the Bears. Further, most of what I read wasn't terribly good about the Bears in the spring -- injuries and poor execution.
You do make a good point: Cal fans should feel better today about quarterback and running back.
Still, I sort of have a hunch about the Bruins -- one that, if they lose at Houston to open the season, I will quickly disavow.
Peter from Salt Lake City writes: A little disappointed in your all pro pac-12 team to see an exclusion of Utes other than Jordan Gross. Steve Smith, Paul Soliai(franchise tag), Sean Smith, Eric Weddle(highest paid safety in the league), and Sione Pouha certainly could have been considered. However, Weddle and Soliai definitely should have been on the list.
Ted Miller: Peter, my honest answer is that I am not as familiar with Utah's past players as I am with the old Pac-10 guys.
Further, as I wrote: "... I racked my brain for exactly 17 minutes and came up with an All-Pac-12 NFL team (Pac-12 fans, I did this quickly, so feel free to chime in your opinions)."
I was being slack and didn't want to spend hours researching the "perfect" guy at every position. But you are correct: Weddle and Soliai would have been good names on the list.
Ben from Centerville, Utah writes: As a lifelong fan of the Utes, I have greatly enjoyed your blog and anticipate reading it from here on out. Question for you: I can't take the suspense. I anticipate that no Utes will make the top 25 list. Is that right? Are there REALLY no Utes in the top 25? I find it difficult to believe.
Ted Miller: No, no player from Utah nor Oregon State made the top-25. From Utah, I considered offensive tackle Tony Bergstrom, quarterback Jordan Wynn and linebacker Chaz Walker.
With 12 teams, a 25-player list is pretty select. My typical reply to a query like this -- and there are lots of them -- is not to ask who from Utah you believe should be on the list but who you would knock off.
And, yes, there probably is some bias against Utah due to playing a Mountain West schedule last season. Wynn's numbers are comparable to Washington State quarterback Jeff Tuel, but Tuel put up his numbers against a far tougher schedule (nonconference game with Oklahoma State, too). And the 6-foot-3, 220-pound Tuel is probably a better NFL prospect due to superior arm strength.
Put it this way: Pac-10 defensive freshman of the year Junior Onyeali is not on the list. Two players who had five interceptions last season, safeties Nate Fellner of Washington and John Boyett of Oregon, are not on the list. Colorado guard Ryan Miller, a potential first-round NFL draft pick, is not on the list.
A lot of really good players are not on the list. Just the way one person's opinion worked out.
And, by the way, the list almost certainly will be much different when we re-do it after the season.
Huy Tran from Eugene writes: If you ever compile a list of your favorite "pump-up" videos throughout the Pac-12 this season, please consider ours. I know there's a million out there, but we've worked long and tirelessly and thought you'd might enjoy it (from an unbiased view, of course).
Ted Miller: Does anyone at Oregon not make football videos?
Anyone else eager to end the worst offseason in the history of college football and start talking about games again?
Thought so.
Follow me on Twitter.
To the notes.
Roger from Oregon writes: I am a high school student in Oregon. It has really been bothering me how many columnists are calling out Darron Thomas and his leadership. I know that he has been in the car on three separate occasions were citations, as well as marijuana were involved. How does this make him a bad leader? At my school, a high school not a university, smoking weed is commonplace. While I don't smoke, most of my friends and about 75% of male athletes do, yet they are still able to be leaders on the football field, basketball court, etc. Maybe weed is taboo for all these old journalists, but in my opinion Darron Thomas is a leader (have you seen him stay in the pocket and take a big hit). His toughness and incredible play make him a leader on the field, I honestly don't care how he spends his time off the field (as long as nobody gets hurt).
Ted Miller: Here's the chief problem with marijuana and high-profile people smoking it: It's against the law, so getting caught with it brings bad publicity.
For a sports team, that could mean said team loses a player to suspension, which would make the team worse than before the player passed the dutchie on the left hand side. So players on a team that smoke the wacky weed, put their team at risk of being less good. Some, including me, would call that selfish.
Does it makes sense that one can legally purchase grain alcohol but not marijuana? Do people lose arguments when they are asked to explain why marijuana is illegal? These are questions the Pac-12 blog will not answer because they lead us on tangents away from the football field.
But I will write on leadership. It's more than taking charge of the huddle. It's more than showing infectious poise when the pressure is on. Or popping up with a confident smirk after a hard hit. We've seen all that from Thomas and we surely will see more of it.
But let's imagine a couple of scenarios.
We are in a car with Thomas and safety Eddie Pleasant in 2008. Pleasant decides to race his car with someone. Instead of what actually happened, this happens.
Thomas: Slow down. This is stupid.
Pleasant: Don't be lame!
Thomas: Being lame is us getting arrested and letting our teammates, coaches and fans down. And racing a car on public roads is a stupid thing immature people do. It's low-rent. So cut the crap before I whup you.
Now we are watching Thomas as he's about to get into a car with cornerback Cliff Harris in June.
Thomas: Cliff. Cliff, look at me.
Harris: Whaaa?
Thomas: Cliff, you do a lot of stupid things. When I am with you, you will not do stupid things. I am not demented enough to think of all the potential stupid things you might do on our drive back to Eugene. But my singular task at this moment in time is to make sure you don't get us in trouble. That means: No speeding. That means: No substances that could get us in trouble will pass within 25 feet of this car.
Harris: Whaaa?
Thomas: Cliff. Cliff, look at me. I am not asking you. I am not presenting an opinion. I am telling you how this ride will be. Nothing means more to me than beating LSU and making Coach Kelly and the Duck nation proud. I particularly want to do more interviews with the Pac-12 blog.
Harris: Yeah, he's cool!
Thomas: Yes, he is. But focus Cliff. Focus. Do you hear me? Speed limit, no illicit substances. Right?
Harris: Gosh, good idea. I can't wait to pick off Jordan Jefferson.
Thomas: Yes, I can't believe Les Miles thought he would be a great quarterback but saw me as just an athlete. Going make that fool eat grass.
Harris: Yeah! By the way, I just finished "Gravity's Rainbow." You were right. It was Pynchon's densest novel, but very rewarding to a patient read.
Now, if Thomas, however he might have accomplished it, had convinced Harris not to drive 118 mph nor allowed anyone to smoke weed in that car, would Ducks fans be celebrating his leadership?
No, because they wouldn't know about it. This embarrassing story wouldn't exist.
And Oregon's chances of beating LSU and winning a national title would be better.
Nick from San Luis Obispo, Calif., writes: Whats your take on the whole players being paid idea? All the ex coaches were on today saying how its a wonderful idea to give players a cost of living expense of $3,000 to $4,000 depending on the school. They also said that this should only be for sports that bring in the money. (men's football and basketball)My reaction is how is this far? Not all schools can afford to give scholarship athletes extra $ giving the ones who can an unfair advantage in recruiting. Also what about all the other sports? Isn't the whole idea of giving extra money to a athlete is so they can live comfortably? (extra spending money for clothes and other food then the cafe) Why is it that only football and basketball players need extra money?
Ted Miller: I agree with a lot of athletic directors: Scholarships should cover full cost of attendance. And I also believe they should be given to every scholarship athlete. Why? Because you can't do it any other way and still be in compliance with Title IX.
You are correct, though. Most schools outside of AQ conferences would be hard-pressed to pay that added expense. That's an issue.
As for why football and men's basketball players believe they should be paid and other college athletes should not? Well, that reasoning is simple. Football and men's basketball make millions every year. And every other sport runs a deficit, many substantial deficits.
Pat from So. Cal writes: In my effort to get any type of response Teddy I've decided to ask you one question everyday until I make the mailbag. For my SECOND question, on this inaugural day of questioning: do you think the university presidents at the largest, most influential schools, across conferences, will get together at some point and begin the process of detaching themselves from the NCAA??? The system doesn't work and we can all yell until we're red in the face but the simple fact remains, there needs to be some sort of governance going on in college REVENUE PRODUCING SPORTS, and it's clear the NCAA has failed its member institutions and that they aren't the right organization.
Ted Miller: There is an undercurrent of feeling that the big football conferences might break away from the NCAA, particularly when we get further consolidation in "super-conferences," which seems inevitable.
That's one reason the NCAA is talking massive reform. We shall see.
What should the NCAA do? Here are a few ideas:
- Full cost of attendance scholarships.
- Assigning an NCAA staffer -- not a university employee -- to each school to act as a head of compliance. If something happens that doesn't cross his desk, it's a major violation.
- A rule that the NCAA's marketing budget shall not exceed what it spends on enforcement. More investigators with good salaries, fewer "We're the NCAA and we're awesome!" commercials.
- An outside team of legal experts -- unaffiliated with universities -- to man an Infractions Committee.
- A streamlining of rules, eliminating many of the piddly, secondary violations.
- An outline of specific consequences for breaking specific rules.
- An understanding that relying on precedent is critical to fairness (that you can't just randomly, say, hammer USC because you're tired of reading about how dominant it is).
Ben from Salt Lake City writes: Can we think about a possible future for a minute? Let's pretend that Utah somehow goes undefeated this year and wins the BCS National Championship game. Then let's assume that next year, both Utah and TCU go undefeated and play each other in the BCS National Championship game. If that ridiculously crazy scenario were to happen, do you think that the media that clings to the idea that the "week in and week out of Non-AQ's is too weak to get them to the NC Game" would go out the window? Do you think it would validate other top Non-AQ teams that have proven themselves like Boise State or BYU? Or do you think that the 100+ year old bias of college football is protected no matter what happens?
Ted Miller: Are you asking if a pattern is established of non-AQ teams going undefeated and winning national championships, will that win over the media?
Yes.
That said: This is Boise State's schedule. This is LSU's schedule.
Anyone saying that an unbeaten Boise State team in 2011 should play for the national championship over a once-beaten LSU team would -- and should -- get laughed out of the room.
Let's not give Boise State or TCU a free pass, either. Both programs are outstanding and worthy of elite rankings, but they also both work the angles to manufacture great records. Neither has adopted the old Bobby Bowden at Florida State "anywhere, anytime" scheduling philosophy.
If either said "we'll go anywhere to play and won't insist on a home-and-home series," we'd see them be able to schedule two or three high-quality games with AQ conferences foes every year.
And, I suspect, we'd see fewer undefeated seasons.
By the way, Utah is now a member of the Pac-12 family. It's in the club, drinking single malt in the beach-front penthouse with UCLA Oregon, Stanford and the rest of the gang.
Rob from San Jose writes: I am wondering how I missed your Post-spring Power Rankings. I thought for sure Cal would be ahead of UCLA; Cal beat UCLA in 2010 and it was not close. Cal has a proven defense (even with three good starters gone), but you think UCLA's defense "will arrive". Could you do a pre-season opener power rankings to see what has changed. ASU has had some bad luck with injuries and some schools have had academic ineligibility concerns. Since Cal's Maynard is QB, Sofele and Deboskie-Johnson have established 1-2 at RB; I am wondering where Cal would rank now?
Ted Miller: And UCLA beat Oregon State, which beat Cal 35-7. Those same Beavers also beat USC 36-7 and USC beat Cal 48-14.
So Cal gets crushed by UCLA if you selectively use the transitive property.
I got to watch UCLA practice this spring and came away impressed, at least with the defense. Cal had closed practices, so I didn't get to see the Bears. Further, most of what I read wasn't terribly good about the Bears in the spring -- injuries and poor execution.
You do make a good point: Cal fans should feel better today about quarterback and running back.
Still, I sort of have a hunch about the Bruins -- one that, if they lose at Houston to open the season, I will quickly disavow.
Peter from Salt Lake City writes: A little disappointed in your all pro pac-12 team to see an exclusion of Utes other than Jordan Gross. Steve Smith, Paul Soliai(franchise tag), Sean Smith, Eric Weddle(highest paid safety in the league), and Sione Pouha certainly could have been considered. However, Weddle and Soliai definitely should have been on the list.
Ted Miller: Peter, my honest answer is that I am not as familiar with Utah's past players as I am with the old Pac-10 guys.
Further, as I wrote: "... I racked my brain for exactly 17 minutes and came up with an All-Pac-12 NFL team (Pac-12 fans, I did this quickly, so feel free to chime in your opinions)."
I was being slack and didn't want to spend hours researching the "perfect" guy at every position. But you are correct: Weddle and Soliai would have been good names on the list.
Ben from Centerville, Utah writes: As a lifelong fan of the Utes, I have greatly enjoyed your blog and anticipate reading it from here on out. Question for you: I can't take the suspense. I anticipate that no Utes will make the top 25 list. Is that right? Are there REALLY no Utes in the top 25? I find it difficult to believe.
Ted Miller: No, no player from Utah nor Oregon State made the top-25. From Utah, I considered offensive tackle Tony Bergstrom, quarterback Jordan Wynn and linebacker Chaz Walker.
With 12 teams, a 25-player list is pretty select. My typical reply to a query like this -- and there are lots of them -- is not to ask who from Utah you believe should be on the list but who you would knock off.
And, yes, there probably is some bias against Utah due to playing a Mountain West schedule last season. Wynn's numbers are comparable to Washington State quarterback Jeff Tuel, but Tuel put up his numbers against a far tougher schedule (nonconference game with Oklahoma State, too). And the 6-foot-3, 220-pound Tuel is probably a better NFL prospect due to superior arm strength.
Put it this way: Pac-10 defensive freshman of the year Junior Onyeali is not on the list. Two players who had five interceptions last season, safeties Nate Fellner of Washington and John Boyett of Oregon, are not on the list. Colorado guard Ryan Miller, a potential first-round NFL draft pick, is not on the list.
A lot of really good players are not on the list. Just the way one person's opinion worked out.
And, by the way, the list almost certainly will be much different when we re-do it after the season.
Huy Tran from Eugene writes: If you ever compile a list of your favorite "pump-up" videos throughout the Pac-12 this season, please consider ours. I know there's a million out there, but we've worked long and tirelessly and thought you'd might enjoy it (from an unbiased view, of course).
Ted Miller: Does anyone at Oregon not make football videos?
Welcome to the last thing you must do before your weekend begins in earnest: Read the mailbag.
This is your brain. This is your brain if you follow me on Twitter. This is your brain if you don't.
To the notes.
Corey from San Francisco writes: So I watched the video about overtaking the SEC, and I find it sort of silly. Do you really think any conference will overtake the SEC any time soon? Will you at least admit the SEC is the best conference? And if so, I'd be curious about your explanation why.
Ted Miller: The SEC is the best conference during the BCS era. There is no way to argue the point: Five consecutive national championships and six different teams with BCS titles. No other conference boasts more than two.
Overtake the SEC? Hard to say. My first response is not anytime soon, at least not as college football is configured at present. If Larry Scott's grand vision of the Pac-16 had gone through, with Texas and Oklahoma among the Big 12 teams defecting to the Pac-10, things might feel very different today.
But this annual debate is a little redundant. So, Corey, I want to focus on the final part of your note: why?
I think it's about more than talent, fan frenzy and money. It's about culture. It's about the total buy-in at places where football is more important -- for better or worse -- than anything else.
There are a lot of good football teams out there as we head into 2011. Plenty of them are capable of winning every game. But the most challenging opponent for many top teams isn't the one on the opposite sideline. It's themselves. It's getting up for every game with maximum focus and preparation and not blowing one or two (or more) games to inferior foes.
My hypothesis is the football culture that surrounds SEC football, that most of the SEC players were raised in, provides that little extra bit of focus and dedication that helps a team avoid the Saturday brain cramp that turns a potential 12-0 team into an 11-1 team. Or a potential 11-1 team into a 9-3 team. Or worse.
The most obvious example in the Pac-10 would be the most successful program of the past decade: USC. The Trojans should have won more than its two national titles under Pete Carroll. In fact, the only defeat USC suffered from 2002-2008 in which you could say the Trojans weren't significant favorites was to Texas in the national title game after the 2005 season. And they were favored in that game. Go through the schedules yourself.
Further, I've also had numerous conversations with Pac-10 players through the years when they've talked about their team losing focus, taking a season for granted, partying too much, a locker room fracturing, etc. Those sorts of things happen everywhere in team sports, I just think they happen more in big city football out West than in the more insular enclaves in the Southeast. And I've lived long periods of time in both places, so I'm not just throwing mud at the wall here and hoping it becomes art.
Yet this cultural challenge -- some might offer that it's actually a healthy perspective -- is not insurmountable. Good coaches can create winning cultures. Let's start with something that might make you cynics roll your eyes: slogans and gimmicks.
The most important thing Chip Kelly brought to Oregon was not its up-tempo, spread option offense. It was this: "Win the day." Or, as the denizens of Autzen Stadium now know it, WTD.
And how many hokey things did Jim Harbaugh do and say at Stanford? "Enthusiasm unknown to mankind!" Gas station work shirts to demonstrate a blue collar attitude. Winning with "character and cruelty."
Even Carroll's "Win forever," was the endlessly repeated mantra of the USC dynasty.
That's why Cal fans may not want to mock coach Jeff Tedford's "Team matters" T-shirts this spring. It may prove to be a stroke of inspiration -- in multiple senses of the term.
You -- or players -- can be cynical about these sorts of things, or about an all-encompassing football culture, but how often does cynicism get cited as a foundational value of a successful venture? Other than a stand-up comedy.
The SEC has great talent, great coaches, big stadiums and lots of money. But its passionate football culture has played a role in the conference's rise.
Can the Pac-12 duplicate that? Probably not, top to bottom. But a program -- or programs -- can. They've just got to create their own obsessive, winning-is-the-only-thing-or-I-will-die, culture.
Ken from Bothell, Wash., writes: With the Pac 12 beginning to digest its new teams, what would be the next logical move for expansion? Obviously, a lot is likely to happen prior to the conference making a move, but do you see Mr. Scott trying to get into the Texas market again?
Ted Miller: Digest! Buffalo sounds tasty, but I'm not sure about Ute.
Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott believes there will be further conference expansion in the future, and his huge brain seems to be three steps ahead of everyone else, so I'm going to go ahead and agree with him.
In fact, he recently told John Henderson of the Denver Post this:
Texas continues to be the big fish, but the Longhorns new network complicates its potential membership in the Pac-12. Still, the marketplace changes quickly. Who knows what the landscape will look like in 2020?
Tyrell from Salt Lake City writes: You were incorrect in regards to football profits last year for Utah. Utah was just shy of $5 million in profit (you can find the numbers from the same Sportsbiz website). That would have put them in ahead of a couple of PAC-10 schools, and considering they were receiving less than $2 million per year from the MTN West -- somewhat impressive. All that said, the new PAC-12 deal can't get here soon enough!
Ted Miller: Yeah, I messed that up -- didn't realize the list was only AQ schools and that's why Utah's numbers from the Mountain West were not included.
Sort of embarrassing because if I had considered it for a moment, there was no way that the Utes were running a $2 million-plus deficit in football. Dumb.
A number of notes on that oversight. Apologies.
Roger from The Woodlands, Texas writes: This was in Wednesday's lunch link regarding a [Publication name withheld] article: "Since the shakeout of last summer with Colorado and Nebraska's decisions to leave the Big 12 Conference, and subsequent frenzy that ultimately ended with only Utah joining CU in the Pac-10, word from several athletics administrators is that CU is having serious buyer's remorse. The splitting of divisions and even the playing of a league championship on home sites has been openly ridiculed within the new Pac-12. The conference in-fighting CU thinks it is leaving in the Big 12 has already ramped up at the Buffs' new home." Have you been hearing any of this? Are you holding out on us?
Ted Miller: It's notable that article is no longer posted. And didn't include a writer's name on it.
Have I heard anything like that? Nothing. Zero. Such sentiments do not exist.
If there is a person out there associated with Colorado experiencing buyers' remorse, please email me.
The only possible explanation would be that Colorado has to buy a new bank vault because its Big 12 version isn't big enough to store the soon-to-be incoming revenue from the RICHEST TV DEAL IN COLLEGE SPORTS HISTORY.
Or perhaps some are broken up about road trips to Seattle, San Francisco, Portland, Phoenix, Tucson and Los Angeles instead of Lubbock, Waco, Norman, Manhattan and Ames?
L Wallace from Yuma, Ariz., writes: That stat about Wazzu being ranked ahead of 5 teams Utah played last yr was striking. I say the most underrated challenge for Utah will be the upgrade in Coaching. I think [Utah coach Kyle] Whittingham is the 3rd best Coach in the P12. However, he and [TCU coach Gary[ Patterson and [Boise State coach Chris] Petersen enjoy such a huge advantage over their peers in the MWC & WAC. In the P12 Utah will face OC's and DC's that are future HC's. They will face dozens of coaches with varying degrees of NFL and bigtime BCS experience. They will face programs that enjoy more resources, video, computer, scouting technology and tools. The "Schematic Advantage" that Whittingham enjoyed in the MWC will be severely tested in the P12.
Ted Miller: Interesting theory.
You would think that the richer programs in the Pac-12, which have more resources for preparation, including coaches who command better salaries, will present a more consistent strategic challenge on a week-to-week basis.
We shall shortly see, eh?
David from Beaverton, Ore., writes: Is it just me or do you notice college football fans start to emulate the characteristics of their team's coach over time? As a Beaver, I noticed Beav fans had a bit of a swagger when Erickson was our coach and for the most part, the fans are more even keeled with Mike Riley. At Oregon, Bellotti and Kelly can and have appeared, how should I put this "a little arrogant" at times and there is a large group of their fans that more than fall into that camp. Trojan fans seemed to have a confident swagger with Carroll, that previously was a quieter confidence in the McKay/Robinson eras.
Ted Miller: Hmm. My first reaction: What might have happened if Jim Harbaugh stuck around Stanford for another five years?
Maybe. But I don't know if I'm really feeling your theory. For one, I've never felt that Mike Bellotti seemed "arrogant." Not any more than any other successful coach.
Do a lot of Penn State fans look and act like Joe Paterno? Bobby Bowden was one of the true gentlemen in coaching; not sure if the Seminole fan base is known for the same. Just as Ohio State fans aren't really known for their senatorial bearing, like the coach formerly known as Jim Tressel was.
Are Arizona fans wound as tightly as Mike Stoops? Will Washington fans shortly adopt the California cool of Steve Sarkisian? How are Cal fans like Jeff Teford?
Or did you just want to drop in a tweak of Chip Kelly?
This is your brain. This is your brain if you follow me on Twitter. This is your brain if you don't.
To the notes.
Corey from San Francisco writes: So I watched the video about overtaking the SEC, and I find it sort of silly. Do you really think any conference will overtake the SEC any time soon? Will you at least admit the SEC is the best conference? And if so, I'd be curious about your explanation why.
Ted Miller: The SEC is the best conference during the BCS era. There is no way to argue the point: Five consecutive national championships and six different teams with BCS titles. No other conference boasts more than two.
Overtake the SEC? Hard to say. My first response is not anytime soon, at least not as college football is configured at present. If Larry Scott's grand vision of the Pac-16 had gone through, with Texas and Oklahoma among the Big 12 teams defecting to the Pac-10, things might feel very different today.
But this annual debate is a little redundant. So, Corey, I want to focus on the final part of your note: why?
I think it's about more than talent, fan frenzy and money. It's about culture. It's about the total buy-in at places where football is more important -- for better or worse -- than anything else.
There are a lot of good football teams out there as we head into 2011. Plenty of them are capable of winning every game. But the most challenging opponent for many top teams isn't the one on the opposite sideline. It's themselves. It's getting up for every game with maximum focus and preparation and not blowing one or two (or more) games to inferior foes.
My hypothesis is the football culture that surrounds SEC football, that most of the SEC players were raised in, provides that little extra bit of focus and dedication that helps a team avoid the Saturday brain cramp that turns a potential 12-0 team into an 11-1 team. Or a potential 11-1 team into a 9-3 team. Or worse.
The most obvious example in the Pac-10 would be the most successful program of the past decade: USC. The Trojans should have won more than its two national titles under Pete Carroll. In fact, the only defeat USC suffered from 2002-2008 in which you could say the Trojans weren't significant favorites was to Texas in the national title game after the 2005 season. And they were favored in that game. Go through the schedules yourself.
Further, I've also had numerous conversations with Pac-10 players through the years when they've talked about their team losing focus, taking a season for granted, partying too much, a locker room fracturing, etc. Those sorts of things happen everywhere in team sports, I just think they happen more in big city football out West than in the more insular enclaves in the Southeast. And I've lived long periods of time in both places, so I'm not just throwing mud at the wall here and hoping it becomes art.
Yet this cultural challenge -- some might offer that it's actually a healthy perspective -- is not insurmountable. Good coaches can create winning cultures. Let's start with something that might make you cynics roll your eyes: slogans and gimmicks.
The most important thing Chip Kelly brought to Oregon was not its up-tempo, spread option offense. It was this: "Win the day." Or, as the denizens of Autzen Stadium now know it, WTD.
And how many hokey things did Jim Harbaugh do and say at Stanford? "Enthusiasm unknown to mankind!" Gas station work shirts to demonstrate a blue collar attitude. Winning with "character and cruelty."
Even Carroll's "Win forever," was the endlessly repeated mantra of the USC dynasty.
That's why Cal fans may not want to mock coach Jeff Tedford's "Team matters" T-shirts this spring. It may prove to be a stroke of inspiration -- in multiple senses of the term.
You -- or players -- can be cynical about these sorts of things, or about an all-encompassing football culture, but how often does cynicism get cited as a foundational value of a successful venture? Other than a stand-up comedy.
The SEC has great talent, great coaches, big stadiums and lots of money. But its passionate football culture has played a role in the conference's rise.
Can the Pac-12 duplicate that? Probably not, top to bottom. But a program -- or programs -- can. They've just got to create their own obsessive, winning-is-the-only-thing-or-I-will-die, culture.
Ken from Bothell, Wash., writes: With the Pac 12 beginning to digest its new teams, what would be the next logical move for expansion? Obviously, a lot is likely to happen prior to the conference making a move, but do you see Mr. Scott trying to get into the Texas market again?
Ted Miller: Digest! Buffalo sounds tasty, but I'm not sure about Ute.
Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott believes there will be further conference expansion in the future, and his huge brain seems to be three steps ahead of everyone else, so I'm going to go ahead and agree with him.
In fact, he recently told John Henderson of the Denver Post this:
Do you see future expansion? “Long term I do. What I found in the process we went through, there were a lot more value for the schools that would be unlocked long term if there were further consolidation. I don’t think we’ll see anything in the next two years.”
Texas continues to be the big fish, but the Longhorns new network complicates its potential membership in the Pac-12. Still, the marketplace changes quickly. Who knows what the landscape will look like in 2020?
Tyrell from Salt Lake City writes: You were incorrect in regards to football profits last year for Utah. Utah was just shy of $5 million in profit (you can find the numbers from the same Sportsbiz website). That would have put them in ahead of a couple of PAC-10 schools, and considering they were receiving less than $2 million per year from the MTN West -- somewhat impressive. All that said, the new PAC-12 deal can't get here soon enough!
Ted Miller: Yeah, I messed that up -- didn't realize the list was only AQ schools and that's why Utah's numbers from the Mountain West were not included.
Sort of embarrassing because if I had considered it for a moment, there was no way that the Utes were running a $2 million-plus deficit in football. Dumb.
A number of notes on that oversight. Apologies.
Roger from The Woodlands, Texas writes: This was in Wednesday's lunch link regarding a [Publication name withheld] article: "Since the shakeout of last summer with Colorado and Nebraska's decisions to leave the Big 12 Conference, and subsequent frenzy that ultimately ended with only Utah joining CU in the Pac-10, word from several athletics administrators is that CU is having serious buyer's remorse. The splitting of divisions and even the playing of a league championship on home sites has been openly ridiculed within the new Pac-12. The conference in-fighting CU thinks it is leaving in the Big 12 has already ramped up at the Buffs' new home." Have you been hearing any of this? Are you holding out on us?
Ted Miller: It's notable that article is no longer posted. And didn't include a writer's name on it.
Have I heard anything like that? Nothing. Zero. Such sentiments do not exist.
If there is a person out there associated with Colorado experiencing buyers' remorse, please email me.
The only possible explanation would be that Colorado has to buy a new bank vault because its Big 12 version isn't big enough to store the soon-to-be incoming revenue from the RICHEST TV DEAL IN COLLEGE SPORTS HISTORY.
Or perhaps some are broken up about road trips to Seattle, San Francisco, Portland, Phoenix, Tucson and Los Angeles instead of Lubbock, Waco, Norman, Manhattan and Ames?
L Wallace from Yuma, Ariz., writes: That stat about Wazzu being ranked ahead of 5 teams Utah played last yr was striking. I say the most underrated challenge for Utah will be the upgrade in Coaching. I think [Utah coach Kyle] Whittingham is the 3rd best Coach in the P12. However, he and [TCU coach Gary[ Patterson and [Boise State coach Chris] Petersen enjoy such a huge advantage over their peers in the MWC & WAC. In the P12 Utah will face OC's and DC's that are future HC's. They will face dozens of coaches with varying degrees of NFL and bigtime BCS experience. They will face programs that enjoy more resources, video, computer, scouting technology and tools. The "Schematic Advantage" that Whittingham enjoyed in the MWC will be severely tested in the P12.
Ted Miller: Interesting theory.
You would think that the richer programs in the Pac-12, which have more resources for preparation, including coaches who command better salaries, will present a more consistent strategic challenge on a week-to-week basis.
We shall shortly see, eh?
David from Beaverton, Ore., writes: Is it just me or do you notice college football fans start to emulate the characteristics of their team's coach over time? As a Beaver, I noticed Beav fans had a bit of a swagger when Erickson was our coach and for the most part, the fans are more even keeled with Mike Riley. At Oregon, Bellotti and Kelly can and have appeared, how should I put this "a little arrogant" at times and there is a large group of their fans that more than fall into that camp. Trojan fans seemed to have a confident swagger with Carroll, that previously was a quieter confidence in the McKay/Robinson eras.
Ted Miller: Hmm. My first reaction: What might have happened if Jim Harbaugh stuck around Stanford for another five years?
Maybe. But I don't know if I'm really feeling your theory. For one, I've never felt that Mike Bellotti seemed "arrogant." Not any more than any other successful coach.
Do a lot of Penn State fans look and act like Joe Paterno? Bobby Bowden was one of the true gentlemen in coaching; not sure if the Seminole fan base is known for the same. Just as Ohio State fans aren't really known for their senatorial bearing, like the coach formerly known as Jim Tressel was.
Are Arizona fans wound as tightly as Mike Stoops? Will Washington fans shortly adopt the California cool of Steve Sarkisian? How are Cal fans like Jeff Teford?
Or did you just want to drop in a tweak of Chip Kelly?
The third edition of Mark Schlabach's Way-Too-Early Preseason Top 25 poll is out, and there has been some movement.
Oklahoma is still No. 1, Alabama is No. 2 and Florida State is No. 3, but there's a new No. 4: Oregon.
And guess who Oregon stepped over to move up from No. 5? Season-opening foe LSU, which fell to No. 5.
Trash talk! Trash talk!
Stanford fell from No. 7 to No. 8. Arizona State climbed to No. 21 from No. 23.
Oklahoma is still No. 1, Alabama is No. 2 and Florida State is No. 3, but there's a new No. 4: Oregon.
And guess who Oregon stepped over to move up from No. 5? Season-opening foe LSU, which fell to No. 5.
Trash talk! Trash talk!
Stanford fell from No. 7 to No. 8. Arizona State climbed to No. 21 from No. 23.
Preseason top 25 features three from Pac-12
April, 25, 2011
4/25/11
11:41
AM ET
By
Ted Miller | ESPN.com
"College Football Live" has completed its preseason top 25, which was completed by a 38-person panel consisting of our analysts, studio hosts, play-by-play announcers, bloggers, researchers and production team members.
It includes three Pac-12 teams: No. 3 Oregon, No. 7 Stanford and No. 25 Arizona State.
Here's the complete poll.
1. Oklahoma
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. LSU
5. Boise State
6. Florida State
7. Stanford
8. South Carolina
9. Oklahoma State
10. Ohio State
11. Texas A&M
12. Arkansas
13. Nebraska
14. Wisconsin
15. TCU
16. Michigan State
17. Notre Dame
18. Florida
19. Virginia Tech
20. Texas
21. Mississippi State
22. Auburn
23. Missouri
24. West Virginia
25. Arizona State
Obviously, this poll makes clear how big the Oregon-LSU game is on Sept. 3 in Cowboys Stadium. Odds are the winner will rise to No. 1, which would then essentially guarantee it a berth in the national title game if it finishes undefeated.
And how times change: Oregon and Stanford ranked in the preseason top-10 and USC nowhere to be found. Not very 2004, eh?
I would have ranked Arizona State higher.
As for the nine unranked members of the Pac-12: Who do you think should have been the fourth ranked team?
It includes three Pac-12 teams: No. 3 Oregon, No. 7 Stanford and No. 25 Arizona State.
Here's the complete poll.
1. Oklahoma
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. LSU
5. Boise State
6. Florida State
7. Stanford
8. South Carolina
9. Oklahoma State
10. Ohio State
11. Texas A&M
12. Arkansas
13. Nebraska
14. Wisconsin
15. TCU
16. Michigan State
17. Notre Dame
18. Florida
19. Virginia Tech
20. Texas
21. Mississippi State
22. Auburn
23. Missouri
24. West Virginia
25. Arizona State
Obviously, this poll makes clear how big the Oregon-LSU game is on Sept. 3 in Cowboys Stadium. Odds are the winner will rise to No. 1, which would then essentially guarantee it a berth in the national title game if it finishes undefeated.
And how times change: Oregon and Stanford ranked in the preseason top-10 and USC nowhere to be found. Not very 2004, eh?
I would have ranked Arizona State higher.
As for the nine unranked members of the Pac-12: Who do you think should have been the fourth ranked team?
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- Oregon is aiming for the first national title in school history, but the Ducks already have made history, at least in terms of the Tostitos BCS National Championship Game.
Oregon's home, Autzen Stadium, which officially seats 54,000, is the smallest in BCS title game history.
The Ducks did average 59,398 fans this year -- 110 percent of capacity -- and that is more than Miami averaged in 2001 (47,162), but the Hurricanes then played in the 74,476-seat Orange Bowl.
Why is this significant? Well, just like when a small-market team makes it to the World Series without a huge payroll, it's meaningful.
Here are the teams that have played -- or will play, in Auburn's case -- in the BCS national title game, which started in 1998, and their official stadium capacities.
Ohio State... 105,329
Tennessee... 102,455
Alabama... 101,821
Texas... 100,119
USC... 93,607
LSU... 92,400
Florida... 88,458
Auburn... 87,451
Nebraska... 86,304
Florida State... 82,112
Oklahoma...82,112
Miami... 74,916
Virginia Tech... 66,233
Oregon's home, Autzen Stadium, which officially seats 54,000, is the smallest in BCS title game history.
The Ducks did average 59,398 fans this year -- 110 percent of capacity -- and that is more than Miami averaged in 2001 (47,162), but the Hurricanes then played in the 74,476-seat Orange Bowl.
Why is this significant? Well, just like when a small-market team makes it to the World Series without a huge payroll, it's meaningful.
Here are the teams that have played -- or will play, in Auburn's case -- in the BCS national title game, which started in 1998, and their official stadium capacities.
Ohio State... 105,329
Tennessee... 102,455
Alabama... 101,821
Texas... 100,119
USC... 93,607
LSU... 92,400
Florida... 88,458
Auburn... 87,451
Nebraska... 86,304
Florida State... 82,112
Oklahoma...82,112
Miami... 74,916
Virginia Tech... 66,233
BCS championship: Twin irresistible forces
January, 4, 2011
1/04/11
9:00
AM ET
By
Ted Miller | ESPN.com
You should find the Tostitos BCS National Championship Game terribly offensive. If you love defense. But for folks who celebrate irresistible forces while finding immovable objects dull, this one should be a grand affair.
If both top-ranked Auburn and No. 2 Oregon hit their season averages on Jan. 10, fans will see 92 points and more than 1,000 yards of offense, including 591 yards rushing. The matchup features the Heisman Trophy winner and the nation's most efficient passer: Tigers quarterback Cam Newton. And it features the nation's leading rusher, Oregon's LaMichael James, who is a unanimous All-American and Heisman finalist.
It features teams that run and pass well. It features teams that don't make a lot of mistakes. It features teams that overwhelm a defense with talent, tempo and creativity.
Finally, the game will showcase two mad scientists of offense who had 37 days without distraction to prepare schematic monstrosities in their underground lairs: Auburn offensive coordinator Gus Malzahn and Oregon coach Chip Kelly.
Muwhahahaha!
The scoreboard should be spinning for a pair of ludicrous speed attacks that had very few off-days this season.
Oh, there are the naysayers. You will get tut-tuts from those who claim "defense wins championships." Some will point out that in previous BCS title games, great offenses have fizzled out.
There's Florida State in 2001, when Chris Weinke & Co. were shut out in a 13-2 defeat to Oklahoma. The Seminoles averaged 549 yards and 42 points per game that year. And there's Oklahoma in 2009, which got stumped by Florida, 24-14. The Sooners averaged 51 points and 548 yards per game that year. Both of those offenses entered the title game being lauded as historically great. Not so much afterwards, though.
And Heisman Trophy winners often go splat in BCS title games, see Weinke, Eric Crouch, Jason White, Troy Smith and Sam Bradford.
Still, the winner of the BCS championship scored more than 30 points in eight of 12 games and more than 40 four times. Potent offenses do show up. Further, in most of the cases when offensive powerhouses have been exposed in the championship game, there's been a reasonable explanation: They faced an elite defense laden with NFL prospects. That is not the case with Auburn and Oregon.
At least that's the perception, one that frustrates Oregon fans. The Ducks rank 12th in the nation in scoring defense, sixth in pass efficiency defense, 16th in run defense and 25th in total defense. So that is pretty darn close to an elite defense, even though the Ducks lack star power. Moreover, Oregon surrendered just 4.53 yards per play, which ranks seventh in the nation and is better than any team the Tigers faced (yes, even Alabama).
The Ducks, however, did face an FCS team and seven FBS offenses ranked 58th in the nation or worse in scoring, including four ranked 96th or worse. They faced only one elite offense in Stanford. The Cardinal scored 31 points and piled up 518 yards, but were shut out in the second half.
Auburn ranks 54th in scoring defense, 55th in total defense and 75th in passing efficiency defense. The Tigers, however, are very good against the run, ranking 10th. They faced three offenses ranked in the top 25 in scoring -- Kentucky, Arkansas and Alabama -- and those foes scored 34, 43 and 27 points, respectively.
Last season's Rose Bowl might offer ideas for both defenses. For the Tigers, the Buckeyes showed a blueprint for how a physical front seven can stymie the Ducks' running attack with penetration, gap integrity and discipline. (Ducks fans would counter that Ohio State's defense looked great because quarterback Jeremiah Masoli couldn't hit the side of a barn in the passing game that afternoon). For the Ducks' veteran defense, it knows what it's like to play against a big, fast quarterback after seeing Terrelle Pryor post what continues to be the best game of his career.
So there is hope for the defenses, though it's hard to imagine both offenses sputtering and the winning total ending up in the 20s.
Of course, even if the offenses churn up yardage, as expected, that doesn't mean a defense won't win this championship. One of the two defenses is going to get more stops than the other, either through forcing turnovers or winning third down (and fourth, both teams aren't afraid to go for it).
Just don't be surprised if you don't need two hands to count the total number of punts.
If both top-ranked Auburn and No. 2 Oregon hit their season averages on Jan. 10, fans will see 92 points and more than 1,000 yards of offense, including 591 yards rushing. The matchup features the Heisman Trophy winner and the nation's most efficient passer: Tigers quarterback Cam Newton. And it features the nation's leading rusher, Oregon's LaMichael James, who is a unanimous All-American and Heisman finalist.
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Dave MartinHeisman winner Cam Newton led the nation in passing efficiency.
AP Photo/Dave MartinHeisman winner Cam Newton led the nation in passing efficiency.Finally, the game will showcase two mad scientists of offense who had 37 days without distraction to prepare schematic monstrosities in their underground lairs: Auburn offensive coordinator Gus Malzahn and Oregon coach Chip Kelly.
Muwhahahaha!
The scoreboard should be spinning for a pair of ludicrous speed attacks that had very few off-days this season.
Oh, there are the naysayers. You will get tut-tuts from those who claim "defense wins championships." Some will point out that in previous BCS title games, great offenses have fizzled out.
There's Florida State in 2001, when Chris Weinke & Co. were shut out in a 13-2 defeat to Oklahoma. The Seminoles averaged 549 yards and 42 points per game that year. And there's Oklahoma in 2009, which got stumped by Florida, 24-14. The Sooners averaged 51 points and 548 yards per game that year. Both of those offenses entered the title game being lauded as historically great. Not so much afterwards, though.
And Heisman Trophy winners often go splat in BCS title games, see Weinke, Eric Crouch, Jason White, Troy Smith and Sam Bradford.
Still, the winner of the BCS championship scored more than 30 points in eight of 12 games and more than 40 four times. Potent offenses do show up. Further, in most of the cases when offensive powerhouses have been exposed in the championship game, there's been a reasonable explanation: They faced an elite defense laden with NFL prospects. That is not the case with Auburn and Oregon.
At least that's the perception, one that frustrates Oregon fans. The Ducks rank 12th in the nation in scoring defense, sixth in pass efficiency defense, 16th in run defense and 25th in total defense. So that is pretty darn close to an elite defense, even though the Ducks lack star power. Moreover, Oregon surrendered just 4.53 yards per play, which ranks seventh in the nation and is better than any team the Tigers faced (yes, even Alabama).
The Ducks, however, did face an FCS team and seven FBS offenses ranked 58th in the nation or worse in scoring, including four ranked 96th or worse. They faced only one elite offense in Stanford. The Cardinal scored 31 points and piled up 518 yards, but were shut out in the second half.
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Mark J. TerrillOregon finished the regular season ranked 25th in total defense.
AP Photo/Mark J. TerrillOregon finished the regular season ranked 25th in total defense.Last season's Rose Bowl might offer ideas for both defenses. For the Tigers, the Buckeyes showed a blueprint for how a physical front seven can stymie the Ducks' running attack with penetration, gap integrity and discipline. (Ducks fans would counter that Ohio State's defense looked great because quarterback Jeremiah Masoli couldn't hit the side of a barn in the passing game that afternoon). For the Ducks' veteran defense, it knows what it's like to play against a big, fast quarterback after seeing Terrelle Pryor post what continues to be the best game of his career.
So there is hope for the defenses, though it's hard to imagine both offenses sputtering and the winning total ending up in the 20s.
Of course, even if the offenses churn up yardage, as expected, that doesn't mean a defense won't win this championship. One of the two defenses is going to get more stops than the other, either through forcing turnovers or winning third down (and fourth, both teams aren't afraid to go for it).
Just don't be surprised if you don't need two hands to count the total number of punts.
Oregon, Stanford and Arizona are on the list of 11 teams still contending for berths in BCS bowl games, the BCS announced Tuesday.
First, there are the contenders for AQ conference titles.
ACC: Florida State, North Carolina State, Virginia Tech
Big East: Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Big Ten: Michigan State, Ohio State, Wisconsin
Big 12: Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M
Pac-10: Oregon, Stanford
SEC: Auburn, South Carolina
A seventh spot will be reserved for the top-rated team from a non-AQ conference: Boise State or TCU. That means there will be three at-large invitations this year.
In addition to the aforementioned teams, the pool of teams remaining under consideration also includes (in alphabetical order): Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Boise State, LSU, Nevada, Utah, and TCU.
The final BCS standings will be compiled Sunday, Dec. 5. The BCS bowl pairings will be announced at 8:15 p.m. EST that evening on ESPN.
First, there are the contenders for AQ conference titles.
ACC: Florida State, North Carolina State, Virginia Tech
Big East: Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Big Ten: Michigan State, Ohio State, Wisconsin
Big 12: Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M
Pac-10: Oregon, Stanford
SEC: Auburn, South Carolina
A seventh spot will be reserved for the top-rated team from a non-AQ conference: Boise State or TCU. That means there will be three at-large invitations this year.
In addition to the aforementioned teams, the pool of teams remaining under consideration also includes (in alphabetical order): Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Boise State, LSU, Nevada, Utah, and TCU.
The final BCS standings will be compiled Sunday, Dec. 5. The BCS bowl pairings will be announced at 8:15 p.m. EST that evening on ESPN.
Pac-10 among all-time BCS 'bridesmaids'
November, 16, 2010
11/16/10
12:05
PM ET
By
Ted Miller | ESPN.com
Ryan McGee takes a look at the teams that got jobbed by the BCS through the years, and ranks three Pac-10 teams among the top-seven.
From 2000, he has Washington tied with Miami at No. 5. That year, you may recall, Miami coach Butch Davis lobbied hard for a spot in the title game opposite Oklahoma, pointing out that his team had beaten Florida State, which would go on to lose to the Sooners. Davis, however, often struggled to remember that his team had been physically manhandled at Washington -- the closeness of the 34-29 final was largely due to huge Huskies mistakes in the second half, not the play of the Hurricanes. The Huskies, of course, had lost at Oregon, which ended up ranked seventh.
At No. 3, he has Oregon from 2001. That was when the Ducks were ranked No. 2 in the polls, but were eclipsed in the final BCS standings by Nebraska, which had been whipped 62-36 by Colorado in the regular-season finale, for a spot opposite Miami in the national title game. The Ducks went on to whip Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl.
I know a lot of Ducks fans don't want to hear this but, well, that was a really, really good Miami team. Winning the Fiesta Bowl might have been a good thing.
At No. 1, McGee has USC from 2003. The Trojans were ranked No. 1 in both polls but the BCS matched LSU and Oklahoma.
My take is different. USC was so obviously the best team that year -- it was named the AP and FWAA national champion -- that just about everyone in the country outside of the Southeast doesn't even remember who won the LSU-Oklahoma game. As McGee points out, a handful of coaches even rebelled against the anti-democratic rules of the final coaches' poll, which requires coaches to vote the winner of the BCS game No. 1, and tapped the Trojans No. 1.
LSU fans obviously will say they disagree with this. But when you look into their eyes, well, you know they know the truth.
From 2000, he has Washington tied with Miami at No. 5. That year, you may recall, Miami coach Butch Davis lobbied hard for a spot in the title game opposite Oklahoma, pointing out that his team had beaten Florida State, which would go on to lose to the Sooners. Davis, however, often struggled to remember that his team had been physically manhandled at Washington -- the closeness of the 34-29 final was largely due to huge Huskies mistakes in the second half, not the play of the Hurricanes. The Huskies, of course, had lost at Oregon, which ended up ranked seventh.
At No. 3, he has Oregon from 2001. That was when the Ducks were ranked No. 2 in the polls, but were eclipsed in the final BCS standings by Nebraska, which had been whipped 62-36 by Colorado in the regular-season finale, for a spot opposite Miami in the national title game. The Ducks went on to whip Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl.
I know a lot of Ducks fans don't want to hear this but, well, that was a really, really good Miami team. Winning the Fiesta Bowl might have been a good thing.
At No. 1, McGee has USC from 2003. The Trojans were ranked No. 1 in both polls but the BCS matched LSU and Oklahoma.
My take is different. USC was so obviously the best team that year -- it was named the AP and FWAA national champion -- that just about everyone in the country outside of the Southeast doesn't even remember who won the LSU-Oklahoma game. As McGee points out, a handful of coaches even rebelled against the anti-democratic rules of the final coaches' poll, which requires coaches to vote the winner of the BCS game No. 1, and tapped the Trojans No. 1.
LSU fans obviously will say they disagree with this. But when you look into their eyes, well, you know they know the truth.
Who's running with a bull market? Who's battling the bears (not the Golden ones)?
Stock up
Darron Thomas: Oregon's sophomore QB completed 22 of 31 passes for 308 yards with three TDs and no interceptions in the 60-13 win over UCLA on Thursday. And he was named a semifinalist for the O'Brien Award, given annually to the nation's best quarterback.
Matt Scott: Arizona's backup QB was outstanding in relief of Nick Foles. He completed 18-of-22 for 223 yards with two TDs and zero interceptions against Washington. He also rushed for 65 yards on seven carries in the 44-14 victory. The performance means there's no need to rush Foles back, even though Foles' recovery from a knee injury is ahead of schedule.
Arizona's defense: If defense wins championships, then the Wildcats can't be counted out of the Pac-10 race. They rank No. 7 in the nation in scoring defense, No. 10 in total defense, No. 7 against the run and their 3.57 sacks per game ranks second. Three new LBs? Co-coordinators? Hey, no worries! (Oh, by the way, former coordinator Mark Stoops is doing pretty darn well at Florida State, too.)
California: If Cal were actually a stock, it would have made and lost fortunes for day traders across the country: The team that was humiliated by USC (buy low!) then blew out Arizona State. So, Bears, do you take the show on the road at Oregon State or is it time to sell high?
Marquess Wilson: Washington State true sophomore QB Jeff Tuel has found his go-to guy in Wilson, a true freshman. Wilson caught six passes for 150 yards with a TD at Stanford and he now leads the Pac-10 with 99.5 yards receiving per game.
Stock down
UCLA: The Bruins have been blown out in consecutive Pac-10 games and they've lost starting QB Kevin Prince for the season. Oh, and two offensive starters were suspended for Saturday's game with Arizona, which has the best defense in the Pac-10. Not a good week.
Washington's defense: The Huskies' defense ranks among the nation's worst in most major statistical categories, including 102nd in scoring (33.1 ppg) and 104th vs. the run (202.7 ypg). It doesn't help that they will play host to Stanford, owners of the conference's best O-line, with their best defensive lineman, Cameron Elisara out. He's the second D-line starter to go down -- the other is end Talia Crichton -- for a unit that isn't deep.
Steven Threet: The Arizona State QB got knocked out of the Cal game with a concussion, but not before throwing two more interceptions, giving him a Pac-10-worst 13, as well as the conference's lowest efficiency rating. In response, the Sun Devils' coaches are going to simplify the offense in order to get Threet back on track.
Jake Locker: He's banged up, the Huskies' bowl hopes are sagging and his numbers aren't good. Locker still figures to be a high NFL draft pick -- just probably not as high if he'd left after his junior season. His senior season, at least so far, can't be what he'd hoped for.
Stanford's pass defense: While the overall numbers are OK, the area that could hold Stanford back this year is pass defense. Tuel completed 21 of 28 passes for 298 yards with four TDs at Stanford, and the health of safety Delano Howell is a concern. Locker might be looking to reverse the course of his -- and the Huskies' -- season against the Cardinal secondary.
Stock up
Darron Thomas: Oregon's sophomore QB completed 22 of 31 passes for 308 yards with three TDs and no interceptions in the 60-13 win over UCLA on Thursday. And he was named a semifinalist for the O'Brien Award, given annually to the nation's best quarterback.
Matt Scott: Arizona's backup QB was outstanding in relief of Nick Foles. He completed 18-of-22 for 223 yards with two TDs and zero interceptions against Washington. He also rushed for 65 yards on seven carries in the 44-14 victory. The performance means there's no need to rush Foles back, even though Foles' recovery from a knee injury is ahead of schedule.
Arizona's defense: If defense wins championships, then the Wildcats can't be counted out of the Pac-10 race. They rank No. 7 in the nation in scoring defense, No. 10 in total defense, No. 7 against the run and their 3.57 sacks per game ranks second. Three new LBs? Co-coordinators? Hey, no worries! (Oh, by the way, former coordinator Mark Stoops is doing pretty darn well at Florida State, too.)
California: If Cal were actually a stock, it would have made and lost fortunes for day traders across the country: The team that was humiliated by USC (buy low!) then blew out Arizona State. So, Bears, do you take the show on the road at Oregon State or is it time to sell high?
Marquess Wilson: Washington State true sophomore QB Jeff Tuel has found his go-to guy in Wilson, a true freshman. Wilson caught six passes for 150 yards with a TD at Stanford and he now leads the Pac-10 with 99.5 yards receiving per game.
Stock down
UCLA: The Bruins have been blown out in consecutive Pac-10 games and they've lost starting QB Kevin Prince for the season. Oh, and two offensive starters were suspended for Saturday's game with Arizona, which has the best defense in the Pac-10. Not a good week.
Washington's defense: The Huskies' defense ranks among the nation's worst in most major statistical categories, including 102nd in scoring (33.1 ppg) and 104th vs. the run (202.7 ypg). It doesn't help that they will play host to Stanford, owners of the conference's best O-line, with their best defensive lineman, Cameron Elisara out. He's the second D-line starter to go down -- the other is end Talia Crichton -- for a unit that isn't deep.
Steven Threet: The Arizona State QB got knocked out of the Cal game with a concussion, but not before throwing two more interceptions, giving him a Pac-10-worst 13, as well as the conference's lowest efficiency rating. In response, the Sun Devils' coaches are going to simplify the offense in order to get Threet back on track.
Jake Locker: He's banged up, the Huskies' bowl hopes are sagging and his numbers aren't good. Locker still figures to be a high NFL draft pick -- just probably not as high if he'd left after his junior season. His senior season, at least so far, can't be what he'd hoped for.
Stanford's pass defense: While the overall numbers are OK, the area that could hold Stanford back this year is pass defense. Tuel completed 21 of 28 passes for 298 yards with four TDs at Stanford, and the health of safety Delano Howell is a concern. Locker might be looking to reverse the course of his -- and the Huskies' -- season against the Cardinal secondary.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Ted Miller
Miller has been covering college football since 1997, starting with Auburn and then heading West to Washington and the Pac-12. His columns for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer won first place in the 2007 APSE Best Writing contest. The Atlanta native and University of Richmond graduate presently lives with his wife in Scottsdale, Ariz.
Kevin Gemmell
Gemmell covered San Diego State and the Mountain West Conference for three years before joining ESPN.com. As a Santa Clara graduate, his hope is that the Broncos will one day re-institute football. Until then, he lives vicariously through his readers. Gemmell lives in California with his wife and son.
PAC-12 TEAM COVERAGE
RECRUITING NATION
USC: We Are SC
Follow everything USC at We Are USC: USC Trojans football, basketball, news, recruiting and more.
• We Are SC | Blog | RecruitingNation
