Pac-12: Georgia Bulldogs
Running back Ty Isaac (Joliet, Ill./Joliet Catholic) has committed to USC, picking the Trojans over numerous offers from across the country, including Georgia, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Notre Dame.
Isaac is ranked 68th on the ESPN Recruiting top 150. Rivals rates Issac as the No. 18 player in the nation and Scout has him ranked 12th.
Isaac, who could also play linebacker, is a power back at 6-foot-2, 215 pounds, but he also has good speed and elusiveness, according to his ESPN evaluation. Last winter, Isaac rushed for 516 yards and six touchdowns in the state championship game. As a junior, he rushed for 2,114 yards -- 11.9 yards per carry -- and scored 45 touchdowns.
Isaac is the Trojans' sixth commitment. They can only sign 15 players due to NCAA sanctions.
The Heisman Pundit has released its official 2012 Heisman Trophy Watch List, and as you’d expect, it’s the usual suspects from the Pac-12 on the list.
Though in alphabetical order, it’s widely assumed that USC quarterback Matt Barkley is the front-runner with all others playing catch-up before the first snap has been taken. Here’s the list.
The Pac-12 blog entertained which player from the conference we thought would emerge as the Heisman winner in a Take 2 back in March. Watch lists are always subject to change, and until we actually see some games, it’s only fun speculation at this point.
No question that Barkley is the early leader in the minds of many. Given his statistics last season, the receivers he has around him and the lofty preseason ranking the Trojans are expected to enjoy, he’s looking down on the pack – at least for now.
Thomas is going to have big play after big play this season, which makes him a very strong Heisman candidate. His exploits can be packaged into an explosive highlight reel that is easily digestible for East Coast voters. No one ever gets tired of seeing 85-yard touchdown runs (unless you're safeties chasing Thomas).
Price lacks the national brand at this point, but that could all change in Week 2 in Baton Rouge. A strong showing against LSU is certain to boost his exposure and could catapult him from dark horse contender to major candidate. And then he's got Stanford, Oregon and USC all in the first six games. He could be the leader at the turn ... or slip out of the running all together.
Though in alphabetical order, it’s widely assumed that USC quarterback Matt Barkley is the front-runner with all others playing catch-up before the first snap has been taken. Here’s the list.
- Tavon Austin, Sr., AP, West Virginia
- Montee Ball, Sr., RB, Wisconsin
- Matt Barkley, Sr., QB, USC
- Tajh Boyd, Jr., QB, Clemson
- Tyler Bray, Jr., QB, Tennessee
- Knile Davis, Jr., RB, Arkansas
- James Franklin, Jr., QB, Missouri
- Landry Jones, Sr., QB, Oklahoma
- Collin Klein, Sr., QB, Kansas State
- Marcus Lattimore, Jr., RB, South Carolina
- Aaron Murray, Jr., QB, Georgia
- Keith Price, Jr., QB, Washington
- Denard Robinson, Sr., QB, Michigan
- Geno Smith, Sr., QB, West Virginia
- De’Anthony Thomas, So., RB, Oregon
- Sammy Watkins, So, WR, Clemson
- Tyler Wilson, Sr., QB, Arkansas
- Cierre Wood, Sr., RB, Notre Dame
The Pac-12 blog entertained which player from the conference we thought would emerge as the Heisman winner in a Take 2 back in March. Watch lists are always subject to change, and until we actually see some games, it’s only fun speculation at this point.
No question that Barkley is the early leader in the minds of many. Given his statistics last season, the receivers he has around him and the lofty preseason ranking the Trojans are expected to enjoy, he’s looking down on the pack – at least for now.
Thomas is going to have big play after big play this season, which makes him a very strong Heisman candidate. His exploits can be packaged into an explosive highlight reel that is easily digestible for East Coast voters. No one ever gets tired of seeing 85-yard touchdown runs (unless you're safeties chasing Thomas).
Price lacks the national brand at this point, but that could all change in Week 2 in Baton Rouge. A strong showing against LSU is certain to boost his exposure and could catapult him from dark horse contender to major candidate. And then he's got Stanford, Oregon and USC all in the first six games. He could be the leader at the turn ... or slip out of the running all together.
Blog debate: Barkley in the SEC?
March, 27, 2012
Mar 27
9:00
AM ET
By
Chris Low and
Ted Miller | ESPN.com
The Pac-12 is the conference of quarterbacks. The SEC is all about defense.
Oh, and winning national championships.
But as good as the defenses are in the SEC, what role does poor-to-middling offense play in that perception? As in, what would happen if those defenses played against a series of future NFL quarterbacks, as Pac-12 (and Big 12) defenses do?
The question before us is this: How would USC quarterback Matt Barkley do against those rough-tough SEC defenses?
Ted Miller: It’s sort of a chicken and the egg question. Are SEC defenses so good because they rarely play against A-list quarterbacks? Or do Pac-12 quarterbacks pile up eye-popping numbers because they don’t play against SEC defenses?
Is it more notable that four of the top 11 quarterbacks in the nation in terms of passing efficiency in 2011 were from the Pac-12, compared to none in the top 20 from the SEC? Or is it more important that six SEC defenses ranked in the top 17 in pass efficiency defense compared to zero for the Pac-12?
It’s hard to say. It’s likely a person’s home -- Los Angeles or Baton Rouge -- has a large influence on his or her opinion.
Pac-12 fans would be prone to point out: In 2005, LSU ranked No. 3 in the nation in passing efficiency defense. But in the Tigers' trip to Tempe that season, Arizona State’s Sam Keller completed 35 of 56 passes for 461 yards with four touchdowns and no interceptions in a 35-31 defeat.
Or this: LSU’s defense did a nice job against Oregon’s offense in the 2011 season opener. Of course, the Ducks scored more points on LSU than ANY OF THE OTHER 13 TEAMS LSU PLAYED.
Apologies for the caps lock. Reckless typing.
While we can all acknowledge the SEC -- at least the elite teams -- play better defense than the rest of the nation, it is also worth noting that when future first-round NFL draft picks played quarterback in the SEC, they put up good numbers, whether we’re talking about the Manning brothers, Matt Stafford or Cam Newton. And I’m sure, one day in the future --perhaps this decade! -- we’ll be able to add a name to that list.
There are some nice quartebacks in the SEC: Tyler Wilson, AJ McCarron and Aaron Murray. All three seem like they’d have a good chance of winning the backup job at USC. Maybe.
Chris Low: No way am I going to argue that Barkley wouldn't have success in the SEC.
He's a future pro and probably the front-runner to win the Heisman Trophy in 2012.
The question is: How much success would he have, and would he hit the proverbial wall going against SEC defenses on a weekly basis?
My feeling is that all quarterbacks hit that wall. Any coach will tell you (ask your buddy Lane Kiffin) that what separates SEC defenses is the speed in the front seven, particularly in the defensive line. There are fast players all over the country in college football, but the SEC has cornered the market on fast, explosive defensive linemen and pass-rushers who also have the size and strength to overpower people.
That's the difference, and that's where Barkley would notice the greatest difference.
It wasn't a banner year for quarterbacks in the SEC last season. And, yes, I realize that's an understatement. But it was a banner year for premier defensive players. That's why the first round of the NFL draft next month is going to look like an SEC who's who. As many as 10 SEC defensive players could go in the first round.
Don't sleep on the SEC's quarterback class this coming season, either. Wilson may be a future first-rounder. Murray has thrown nearly 60 touchdown passes in his first two seasons, and we all saw what McCarron did in the BCS title game against an LSU defense that was outstanding.
Barkley's a big-time talent, no question. But it's a different game when you're trying to throw from your back.
And in this league, ALL QUARTERBACKS (sorry, my caps tend to lock up, too) encounter that problem.
Ted Miller: Truth is, Wilson, Murray and McCarron are good quarterbacks who look like guys with NFL futures. Loved how McCarron handled the pressure of the title game, and Murray has Pac-12-type talent.
We're trash talking here, but if you can't acknowledge what is real, well, then it's just noise.
And the reality of this debate is this: Barkley would be more challenged on a weekly basis by SEC defenses than by Pac-12 defenses -- which I believe are underrated but still a step behind the SEC for the reasons the Inimitable Low mentioned above. If Barkley played at Vanderbilt, Mississippi State or Kentucky, he'd just be the best quarterback in the history of those programs while leading those teams to "historic" seasons. Like a third-place finish in their divisions.
Yet what makes Barkley, Barkley is not just Barkley. It's USC. It's his supporting cast. It's receivers Robert Woods and Marqise Lee, who will both have NFL careers. And two tight ends who will also. And a good offensive line, and a 1,000-yard rusher who averaged 6.9 yards per carry in 2011 (Curtis McNeal).
By the way, if you wonder where USC's true potential Achilles heel is this year, it's the defensive line. The Trojans have three A-listers -- guys who would be touted in the SEC -- but are thin thereafter. That's a problem for a team that views itself as a national title contender.
That's ultimately the rub here, too. If all goes according to plan, Barkley and USC should be in position to play for the national title. It's hard to imagine that wouldn't be against another SEC team.
Now, Chris, wouldn't it be fun if it were USC and LSU? Recall that in 2003, LSU won 1/16 of the national title when no one in the entire world thought LSU was better than USC, other than computers obviously loaded with all sorts of viruses.
Or USC-Alabama? Great history, and Saban versus Barkley & Co. would certainly attract plenty of eyeballs.
Chris Low: One of the most compelling things that could happen to college football next season would be for USC and Barkley to take their shot at an SEC defense in the money game.
Then, we could quit debating and let it play out on the field. As much as I knew that Alabama and LSU were the two best teams in the country last season, there was a part of me that wanted to see Oklahoma State against either the Alabama or LSU defense in the BCS title game.
It's the matchup we all want to see: A high-powered offense versus a suffocating defense.
Maybe that's what we'll be treated to this fall.
Of course, I go back to the 2010 national title game, and Oregon had been short-circuiting scoreboards all season long. The Ducks go up against an Auburn defense that had been opportunistic, but wasn't one of the best in the SEC that season statistically. But in that game, Auburn put the clamps on Oregon and won 22-19.
The Tigers won because the Ducks couldn't block Nick Fairley.
And that's what the Trojans would run into if they find themselves up against an SEC team next January in Miami.
It won't come down to Barkley. Sure, he'll make a few plays. He's legit. But what it will come down to is the group of guys blocking for Barkley, and that's where it always gets ugly against SEC defenses.
In the meantime, just make sure the Trojans get there. They've been known to stumble along the way, and what we're left with is a bunch of hollow chatter about what they would have done (or could have done) had they made it to the party.
We'll check the guest list in December and chat again then.
Oh, and winning national championships.
But as good as the defenses are in the SEC, what role does poor-to-middling offense play in that perception? As in, what would happen if those defenses played against a series of future NFL quarterbacks, as Pac-12 (and Big 12) defenses do?
The question before us is this: How would USC quarterback Matt Barkley do against those rough-tough SEC defenses?
Ted Miller: It’s sort of a chicken and the egg question. Are SEC defenses so good because they rarely play against A-list quarterbacks? Or do Pac-12 quarterbacks pile up eye-popping numbers because they don’t play against SEC defenses?
[+] Enlarge
Harry How/Getty ImagesWould Matt Barkley be as successful if he played against SEC defenses all season?
Harry How/Getty ImagesWould Matt Barkley be as successful if he played against SEC defenses all season?It’s hard to say. It’s likely a person’s home -- Los Angeles or Baton Rouge -- has a large influence on his or her opinion.
Pac-12 fans would be prone to point out: In 2005, LSU ranked No. 3 in the nation in passing efficiency defense. But in the Tigers' trip to Tempe that season, Arizona State’s Sam Keller completed 35 of 56 passes for 461 yards with four touchdowns and no interceptions in a 35-31 defeat.
Or this: LSU’s defense did a nice job against Oregon’s offense in the 2011 season opener. Of course, the Ducks scored more points on LSU than ANY OF THE OTHER 13 TEAMS LSU PLAYED.
Apologies for the caps lock. Reckless typing.
While we can all acknowledge the SEC -- at least the elite teams -- play better defense than the rest of the nation, it is also worth noting that when future first-round NFL draft picks played quarterback in the SEC, they put up good numbers, whether we’re talking about the Manning brothers, Matt Stafford or Cam Newton. And I’m sure, one day in the future --perhaps this decade! -- we’ll be able to add a name to that list.
There are some nice quartebacks in the SEC: Tyler Wilson, AJ McCarron and Aaron Murray. All three seem like they’d have a good chance of winning the backup job at USC. Maybe.
Chris Low: No way am I going to argue that Barkley wouldn't have success in the SEC.
He's a future pro and probably the front-runner to win the Heisman Trophy in 2012.
The question is: How much success would he have, and would he hit the proverbial wall going against SEC defenses on a weekly basis?
My feeling is that all quarterbacks hit that wall. Any coach will tell you (ask your buddy Lane Kiffin) that what separates SEC defenses is the speed in the front seven, particularly in the defensive line. There are fast players all over the country in college football, but the SEC has cornered the market on fast, explosive defensive linemen and pass-rushers who also have the size and strength to overpower people.
That's the difference, and that's where Barkley would notice the greatest difference.
It wasn't a banner year for quarterbacks in the SEC last season. And, yes, I realize that's an understatement. But it was a banner year for premier defensive players. That's why the first round of the NFL draft next month is going to look like an SEC who's who. As many as 10 SEC defensive players could go in the first round.
Don't sleep on the SEC's quarterback class this coming season, either. Wilson may be a future first-rounder. Murray has thrown nearly 60 touchdown passes in his first two seasons, and we all saw what McCarron did in the BCS title game against an LSU defense that was outstanding.
Barkley's a big-time talent, no question. But it's a different game when you're trying to throw from your back.
And in this league, ALL QUARTERBACKS (sorry, my caps tend to lock up, too) encounter that problem.
Ted Miller: Truth is, Wilson, Murray and McCarron are good quarterbacks who look like guys with NFL futures. Loved how McCarron handled the pressure of the title game, and Murray has Pac-12-type talent.
[+] Enlarge
Ronald Martinez/Getty ImagesAlabama's defense smothered Jordan Jefferson and the LSU Tigers in the BCS championship game.
Ronald Martinez/Getty ImagesAlabama's defense smothered Jordan Jefferson and the LSU Tigers in the BCS championship game.And the reality of this debate is this: Barkley would be more challenged on a weekly basis by SEC defenses than by Pac-12 defenses -- which I believe are underrated but still a step behind the SEC for the reasons the Inimitable Low mentioned above. If Barkley played at Vanderbilt, Mississippi State or Kentucky, he'd just be the best quarterback in the history of those programs while leading those teams to "historic" seasons. Like a third-place finish in their divisions.
Yet what makes Barkley, Barkley is not just Barkley. It's USC. It's his supporting cast. It's receivers Robert Woods and Marqise Lee, who will both have NFL careers. And two tight ends who will also. And a good offensive line, and a 1,000-yard rusher who averaged 6.9 yards per carry in 2011 (Curtis McNeal).
By the way, if you wonder where USC's true potential Achilles heel is this year, it's the defensive line. The Trojans have three A-listers -- guys who would be touted in the SEC -- but are thin thereafter. That's a problem for a team that views itself as a national title contender.
That's ultimately the rub here, too. If all goes according to plan, Barkley and USC should be in position to play for the national title. It's hard to imagine that wouldn't be against another SEC team.
Now, Chris, wouldn't it be fun if it were USC and LSU? Recall that in 2003, LSU won 1/16 of the national title when no one in the entire world thought LSU was better than USC, other than computers obviously loaded with all sorts of viruses.
Or USC-Alabama? Great history, and Saban versus Barkley & Co. would certainly attract plenty of eyeballs.
Chris Low: One of the most compelling things that could happen to college football next season would be for USC and Barkley to take their shot at an SEC defense in the money game.
Then, we could quit debating and let it play out on the field. As much as I knew that Alabama and LSU were the two best teams in the country last season, there was a part of me that wanted to see Oklahoma State against either the Alabama or LSU defense in the BCS title game.
It's the matchup we all want to see: A high-powered offense versus a suffocating defense.
Maybe that's what we'll be treated to this fall.
Of course, I go back to the 2010 national title game, and Oregon had been short-circuiting scoreboards all season long. The Ducks go up against an Auburn defense that had been opportunistic, but wasn't one of the best in the SEC that season statistically. But in that game, Auburn put the clamps on Oregon and won 22-19.
The Tigers won because the Ducks couldn't block Nick Fairley.
And that's what the Trojans would run into if they find themselves up against an SEC team next January in Miami.
It won't come down to Barkley. Sure, he'll make a few plays. He's legit. But what it will come down to is the group of guys blocking for Barkley, and that's where it always gets ugly against SEC defenses.
In the meantime, just make sure the Trojans get there. They've been known to stumble along the way, and what we're left with is a bunch of hollow chatter about what they would have done (or could have done) had they made it to the party.
We'll check the guest list in December and chat again then.
Take 2: Pac-12's second-best coach?
March, 23, 2012
Mar 23
12:00
PM ET
By
Ted Miller and
Kevin Gemmell | ESPN.com
Folks like rankings, which is why a lot of you had opinions on both Athlon Sports and our rankings of Pac-12 coaches this week.
There are very few naysayers to the idea that Oregon's Chip Kelly is an obvious No. 1. In fact, I'm not even sure how you gainsay that.
But who's No. 2?
That's the question before your faithful Pac-12 bloggers.
Kevin Gemmell: Since you went first last week, and I used it as an opportunity to take a shot at you about Darron/De'Anthony Thomas Top 25 incident, I'll take the lead this week and suffer whatever ribbing comes from it.
To be honest, I was pretty torn when trying to figure out who I would put at No. 2 in the conference. I think you can easily make an argument for three or four different guys. But I've also seen what Kyle Whittingham has done at Utah from the very beginning when I used to cover the Mountain West Conference.
His résumé is stellar, and his credentials are without question. He has an undefeated season to his credit and two BCS bowl game victories (I believe the NCAA credits him and Urban Meyer both for the Fiesta Bowl win). If I'm wrong on that, he still has a BCS bowl victory at a then mid-major program.
He's 7-1 all-time in bowl games. That means he's a closer. The only bowl loss was in 2010 to Boise State -- the Broncos' second football game following the Nevada field goal debacle. There weren't many that thought Boise would lose that one.
What I think is the most impressive thing about Whittingham, though, is that he's proven to be his own man. He easily could have fallen into the trap that David Shaw now finds himself in at Stanford. Critics will constantly question Shaw about if he can do it outside of Jim Harbaugh's shadow and without Andrew Luck on the roster. Whittingham faced similar charges in the face of Meyer's departure.
In that time, he's gone 66-25 and stewarded the program into the Pac-12, where the Utes went 8-5 last season, including a come-from-behind win over Georgia Tech in the Sun Bowl. Sustained success means several things. He can recruit. He can reinvent himself and the team with each new generation of players. And he makes good hires.
We all know one bad recruiting class can set a program back several years. Bad hires can have an even longer impact. Whittingham is not afraid to take gambles -- and the latest one is naming former quarterback-turned quarterbacks coach Brian Johnson his offensive coordinator. At least some see it as a gamble. But Whittingham has given us no reason over his career to think it's not going to be a great hire.
The fact is, Whittingham wins year after year. Can't ask for much more out of your coach.
Ted Miller: I deserved the snark over the twin No. 12s. That was a moment of clumsy compensation for a boneheaded oversight on my part. Of course, you did steal my No. 2 coach, which I will write off to your savvy and your foreknowledge you got to go first this week.
And it gives me a chance to tout a guy who might shortly challenge for the top-spot on this list: Arizona's Rich Rodriguez. In fact, if we could make Rodriguez's ill-fated, three-year tenure at Michigan magically disappear, and then view Rodriguez as arriving in Tucson after a brilliant run at West Virginia, you would be able to make a case for him against even Kelly.
Before the disaster in Ann Arbor, Rodriguez was widely viewed as among the nation's best coaches. He'd been successful everywhere he went, and was considered one of the nation's truly great offensive minds -- not unlike Kelly. He went 60-26 at West Virginia and, after going 3-8 his first year, never won fewer than eight games. He also won a Sugar Bowl over Georgia, and his team won the Fiesta Bowl over Oklahoma after he bolted for Michigan. The Mountaineers won 33 games his final three seasons. According to this high-powered calculator, that's an average of 11 wins per season.
But what about Michigan? Well, as we've said before and surely will say again, his failure at Michigan was more about Michigan than Rich Rodriguez. It was a bad fit from the get-go in terms of his personality versus the "Michigan way"; Rodriguez wasn't able to hire his defensive coordinator, as he has done at Arizona with Jeff Casteel; he was shamefully betrayed and undermined by a Machiavellian Lloyd Carr; and it's not unreasonable to question the agendas of some of the media coverage he received.
Some Michigan fans take issue with that perspective on Rodriguez's Michigan tenure, much of which is detailed in John Bacon's book "Three and Out." But only because they love the Wolverines more than the truth, at least in this instance.
Rodriguez repeatedly has said he's not a quick-fix guy -- he, by the way, told the folks hiring him at Michigan exactly that -- and that it will take three years for his systems and recruiting to truly take hold. I doubt Wildcats fans are exciting about waiting that long, but the smart money is on Rodriguez finding a way to get it done in Tucson.
And, yeah, that means it's legitimate to dream about a first Rose Bowl within five years.
Wouldn't it be fun if it were against the Wolverines?
There are very few naysayers to the idea that Oregon's Chip Kelly is an obvious No. 1. In fact, I'm not even sure how you gainsay that.
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Mark J. TerrillKyle Whittingham is 7-1 in bowl games, including a BCS victory.
AP Photo/Mark J. TerrillKyle Whittingham is 7-1 in bowl games, including a BCS victory.That's the question before your faithful Pac-12 bloggers.
Kevin Gemmell: Since you went first last week, and I used it as an opportunity to take a shot at you about Darron/De'Anthony Thomas Top 25 incident, I'll take the lead this week and suffer whatever ribbing comes from it.
To be honest, I was pretty torn when trying to figure out who I would put at No. 2 in the conference. I think you can easily make an argument for three or four different guys. But I've also seen what Kyle Whittingham has done at Utah from the very beginning when I used to cover the Mountain West Conference.
His résumé is stellar, and his credentials are without question. He has an undefeated season to his credit and two BCS bowl game victories (I believe the NCAA credits him and Urban Meyer both for the Fiesta Bowl win). If I'm wrong on that, he still has a BCS bowl victory at a then mid-major program.
He's 7-1 all-time in bowl games. That means he's a closer. The only bowl loss was in 2010 to Boise State -- the Broncos' second football game following the Nevada field goal debacle. There weren't many that thought Boise would lose that one.
What I think is the most impressive thing about Whittingham, though, is that he's proven to be his own man. He easily could have fallen into the trap that David Shaw now finds himself in at Stanford. Critics will constantly question Shaw about if he can do it outside of Jim Harbaugh's shadow and without Andrew Luck on the roster. Whittingham faced similar charges in the face of Meyer's departure.
In that time, he's gone 66-25 and stewarded the program into the Pac-12, where the Utes went 8-5 last season, including a come-from-behind win over Georgia Tech in the Sun Bowl. Sustained success means several things. He can recruit. He can reinvent himself and the team with each new generation of players. And he makes good hires.
We all know one bad recruiting class can set a program back several years. Bad hires can have an even longer impact. Whittingham is not afraid to take gambles -- and the latest one is naming former quarterback-turned quarterbacks coach Brian Johnson his offensive coordinator. At least some see it as a gamble. But Whittingham has given us no reason over his career to think it's not going to be a great hire.
The fact is, Whittingham wins year after year. Can't ask for much more out of your coach.
Ted Miller: I deserved the snark over the twin No. 12s. That was a moment of clumsy compensation for a boneheaded oversight on my part. Of course, you did steal my No. 2 coach, which I will write off to your savvy and your foreknowledge you got to go first this week.
[+] Enlarge
Courtesy of J&L PhotoRich Rodriguez led West Virginia to two BCS games, but struggled considerably at Michigan.
Courtesy of J&L PhotoRich Rodriguez led West Virginia to two BCS games, but struggled considerably at Michigan.Before the disaster in Ann Arbor, Rodriguez was widely viewed as among the nation's best coaches. He'd been successful everywhere he went, and was considered one of the nation's truly great offensive minds -- not unlike Kelly. He went 60-26 at West Virginia and, after going 3-8 his first year, never won fewer than eight games. He also won a Sugar Bowl over Georgia, and his team won the Fiesta Bowl over Oklahoma after he bolted for Michigan. The Mountaineers won 33 games his final three seasons. According to this high-powered calculator, that's an average of 11 wins per season.
But what about Michigan? Well, as we've said before and surely will say again, his failure at Michigan was more about Michigan than Rich Rodriguez. It was a bad fit from the get-go in terms of his personality versus the "Michigan way"; Rodriguez wasn't able to hire his defensive coordinator, as he has done at Arizona with Jeff Casteel; he was shamefully betrayed and undermined by a Machiavellian Lloyd Carr; and it's not unreasonable to question the agendas of some of the media coverage he received.
Some Michigan fans take issue with that perspective on Rodriguez's Michigan tenure, much of which is detailed in John Bacon's book "Three and Out." But only because they love the Wolverines more than the truth, at least in this instance.
Rodriguez repeatedly has said he's not a quick-fix guy -- he, by the way, told the folks hiring him at Michigan exactly that -- and that it will take three years for his systems and recruiting to truly take hold. I doubt Wildcats fans are exciting about waiting that long, but the smart money is on Rodriguez finding a way to get it done in Tucson.
And, yeah, that means it's legitimate to dream about a first Rose Bowl within five years.
Wouldn't it be fun if it were against the Wolverines?
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.
It was about this time last year that people started predicting that Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck would hoist the Heisman Trophy. How'd that work out, by the way? Still, it's not too soon to start looking at some odds.
Odds maker Danny Sheridan -- as originally reported with Alabama flavor by Izzy Gould of al.com -- released his 2012 Heisman odds Tuesday and his list includes three Pac-12 candidates in total and one obvious front-runner.
At first glance, Barkley is the obvious choice. He has a very good offensive line protecting him -- including the nation's top center in Khaled Holmes (just once, I'd love to see a center get Heisman love). The running game will come together, but until it does, you might see Barkley pass a little more. And why not? With his receivers he should put up crazy good numbers. A little surprised not to see Robert Woods on this list.
Thomas is going to do what Thomas does -- run really, really fast and score a lot of touchdowns. His chances might be hampered a bit by splitting carries with Kenjon Barner (by the way, shouldn't he be on this list also?). But with the amount of plays Oregon runs per game, that shouldn't be too much of a concern. Because Thomas is a speed guy, he's also going to have to get over the national stigma that he can't run between tackles. LaMichael James had the same label, but was quite good this past season at going up the middle.
Price is the wild card of this bunch. Last year, he spent the season with a lot of nagging injuries that forced him to be a better pocket passer. But when healthy -- as we saw in the Alamo Bowl with his three rushing touchdowns -- he can be just as explosive with his legs. Next season he should be a true dual threat and a player that should warrant serious consideration.
Other players picked by Sheridan include:
But as we've seen in recent years, there is always an out-of-nowhere candidate that was off the radar. Just looking at this awfully impressive lineup, however, it seems like it's going to be tough for an unknown to wiggle his way in.
Odds maker Danny Sheridan -- as originally reported with Alabama flavor by Izzy Gould of al.com -- released his 2012 Heisman odds Tuesday and his list includes three Pac-12 candidates in total and one obvious front-runner.
- USC quarterback Matt Barkley tops the list at 5-1 odds.
- Oregon running back De'Anthony Thomas checks in at 25-1 odds.
- Washington quarterback Keith Price is the darkhorse at 40-1.
At first glance, Barkley is the obvious choice. He has a very good offensive line protecting him -- including the nation's top center in Khaled Holmes (just once, I'd love to see a center get Heisman love). The running game will come together, but until it does, you might see Barkley pass a little more. And why not? With his receivers he should put up crazy good numbers. A little surprised not to see Robert Woods on this list.
Thomas is going to do what Thomas does -- run really, really fast and score a lot of touchdowns. His chances might be hampered a bit by splitting carries with Kenjon Barner (by the way, shouldn't he be on this list also?). But with the amount of plays Oregon runs per game, that shouldn't be too much of a concern. Because Thomas is a speed guy, he's also going to have to get over the national stigma that he can't run between tackles. LaMichael James had the same label, but was quite good this past season at going up the middle.
Price is the wild card of this bunch. Last year, he spent the season with a lot of nagging injuries that forced him to be a better pocket passer. But when healthy -- as we saw in the Alamo Bowl with his three rushing touchdowns -- he can be just as explosive with his legs. Next season he should be a true dual threat and a player that should warrant serious consideration.
Other players picked by Sheridan include:
- Wisconsin running back Montee Ball: 6-1
- Oklahoma quarterback Landry Jones: 7-1
- Michigan quarterback Denard Robinson: 7-1
- West Virginia quarterback Geno Smith: 10-1
- Georgia quarterback Aaron Murray: 12-1
- Arkansas quarterback Tyler Wilson: 15-1
- Kansas quarterback Dayne Crist: 25-1
- Nebraska running back Rex Burkhead: 25-1
- Clemson wide receiver Sammy Watkins: 25-1
- Alabama quarterback AJ McCarron: 30-1
But as we've seen in recent years, there is always an out-of-nowhere candidate that was off the radar. Just looking at this awfully impressive lineup, however, it seems like it's going to be tough for an unknown to wiggle his way in.
Working off of Mark Schlabach's most recent "way-too-early" top 25, Brian Fremeau looked at the top five teams on Schlabach's ranking and 
decided to pick apart the holes.
Topping that list are the USC Trojans.
Fremeau on the Trojans:
Offensively, there isn't much to complain about other than the current vacancies at left tackle and fullback. And the defense should continue to improve under Monte Kiffin's tutelage.
Naturally, there are holes to fill -- specifically on the defensive line, where some shuffling is bound to happen in order to replace Christian Tupou, DaJohn Harris and Nick Perry. But the fact that safety T.J. McDonald decided to return -- thus giving the back seven another full year together -- bodes well for USC's defense to make more strides next season.
decided to pick apart the holes.
Topping that list are the USC Trojans.
Fremeau on the Trojans:
Generating consistency and dominance on defense needs to be the point of emphasis this spring. The Trojans forced three-and-outs on only 32 percent of opponent drives last year, the 70th-best rate in the nation. All 10 BCS bowl team defenses last season were better at getting opponent offenses off the field more quickly. (The other four teams in this article [Alabama, LSU, Oklahoma and Georgia] were much better at forcing three-and-outs, each ranked in the top 12 in this metric last season). Those extended drives were a major liability in USC's losses to Stanford and Arizona State last year -- the Trojans gave up 92 offensive points on only 26 non-garbage opponent drives.
Offensively, there isn't much to complain about other than the current vacancies at left tackle and fullback. And the defense should continue to improve under Monte Kiffin's tutelage.
Naturally, there are holes to fill -- specifically on the defensive line, where some shuffling is bound to happen in order to replace Christian Tupou, DaJohn Harris and Nick Perry. But the fact that safety T.J. McDonald decided to return -- thus giving the back seven another full year together -- bodes well for USC's defense to make more strides next season.
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.
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.
Three keys for Arizona State (6-6) if it's going to shock the world and upset Boise State.
1. Fast and physical: All things being equal, it's not unreasonable to at least mostly subscribe to AQ conference snobbism -- Arizona State should have bigger, faster players than Boise State. That obviously didn't help Georgia when the Broncos took the lumber to the Bulldogs in the season opener, but the Sun Devils should be able to win many one-on-one matchups and make plays in space. Somehow, they need to exploit that superiority. Or is it mythical superiority?
2. Disrupt Boise State's rhythm: Boise State is 10th in the nation in scoring defense and ninth in scoring offense. The Broncos pretty much do everything well. The Sun Devils need to take away what they most want to do on both sides of the ball and force them into a plan B. Easier said than done against a team with no obvious weaknesses. We were going to say the Sun Devils need to force turnovers and pressure Kellen Moore, but the Broncos are 15th in the nation in turnover margin -- they protect the football -- and are No. 1 in sacks allowed, surrendering fewer than one per game. Arizona State should try to do those things, sure, but most other teams have failed.
3. Smart and efficient play, yes, but playing loose and frenzied, too: Simply, if Arizona State has a bunch of turnovers and penalties it's going to get stomped. But the Sun Devils under Dennis Erickson have always been edgy and messy. They posted some of their better wins by mixing athletic, big plays with boneheaded ones. It's unlikely they reinvent themselves on the final day of his tenure. So go crazy, Sun Devils. Jump around. Play until the echo of the whistle. Perhaps get Boise State off its game with extracurriculars. If both teams are sloppy, you'd like the Sun Devils' chances a lot better.
1. Fast and physical: All things being equal, it's not unreasonable to at least mostly subscribe to AQ conference snobbism -- Arizona State should have bigger, faster players than Boise State. That obviously didn't help Georgia when the Broncos took the lumber to the Bulldogs in the season opener, but the Sun Devils should be able to win many one-on-one matchups and make plays in space. Somehow, they need to exploit that superiority. Or is it mythical superiority?
2. Disrupt Boise State's rhythm: Boise State is 10th in the nation in scoring defense and ninth in scoring offense. The Broncos pretty much do everything well. The Sun Devils need to take away what they most want to do on both sides of the ball and force them into a plan B. Easier said than done against a team with no obvious weaknesses. We were going to say the Sun Devils need to force turnovers and pressure Kellen Moore, but the Broncos are 15th in the nation in turnover margin -- they protect the football -- and are No. 1 in sacks allowed, surrendering fewer than one per game. Arizona State should try to do those things, sure, but most other teams have failed.
3. Smart and efficient play, yes, but playing loose and frenzied, too: Simply, if Arizona State has a bunch of turnovers and penalties it's going to get stomped. But the Sun Devils under Dennis Erickson have always been edgy and messy. They posted some of their better wins by mixing athletic, big plays with boneheaded ones. It's unlikely they reinvent themselves on the final day of his tenure. So go crazy, Sun Devils. Jump around. Play until the echo of the whistle. Perhaps get Boise State off its game with extracurriculars. If both teams are sloppy, you'd like the Sun Devils' chances a lot better.
Some become college football fans to root for someone. Some become fans to root against someone.
This blog entry intends to help the latter.
You can find USA Today's graphic here on how the coaches voted in their final poll. It allows you to be outraged at the coaches who think the least of YOUR team.
Prepare your angry face.
Here's a neat one. Remember how Georgia ran -- quivering like a cornered kitten -- from a game contract with Oregon? Guess who voted the Ducks eighth, lower than any other coach? That would be Georgia's Mark Richt.
I bet he cackled when he did it ... and said, "Go Huskies."
And the coach of the Ducks' Rose Bowl opponent doesn't think too highly of Oregon. Wisconsin's Bret Bielema ranked the Ducks seventh, as did Baylor's Art Briles and San Diego State's Rocky Long.
As for Stanford, it was ranked sixth by three coaches: Fresno State's Pat Hill, Boise State's Chris Petersen and Buffalo's Jeff Quinn.
Stanford was fourth in the coaches' poll and Oregon was fifth.
Be angry. It's a great way to start off a Monday morning.
This blog entry intends to help the latter.
You can find USA Today's graphic here on how the coaches voted in their final poll. It allows you to be outraged at the coaches who think the least of YOUR team.
Prepare your angry face.
Here's a neat one. Remember how Georgia ran -- quivering like a cornered kitten -- from a game contract with Oregon? Guess who voted the Ducks eighth, lower than any other coach? That would be Georgia's Mark Richt.
I bet he cackled when he did it ... and said, "Go Huskies."
And the coach of the Ducks' Rose Bowl opponent doesn't think too highly of Oregon. Wisconsin's Bret Bielema ranked the Ducks seventh, as did Baylor's Art Briles and San Diego State's Rocky Long.
As for Stanford, it was ranked sixth by three coaches: Fresno State's Pat Hill, Boise State's Chris Petersen and Buffalo's Jeff Quinn.
Stanford was fourth in the coaches' poll and Oregon was fifth.
Be angry. It's a great way to start off a Monday morning.
Mailbag: Playoffs, new hires & Crazy Ladies
December, 2, 2011
12/02/11
3:20
PM ET
By
Ted Miller | ESPN.com
Happy Friday.
Click here to join a fabulous journey.
To the notes.
Jeremy from Hastings, Neb., writes: Oh, my head. Right now, we are one fluke away from a Rose Bowl that includes a 7-6 UCLA team and a national championship game including two teams that did not win their conference. (Should Georgia pull off the upset, it is entirely possible voters still see it fit to put LSU against Alabama though neither team will have won the SEC.) My question is this. Is it really in the best interest of all involved to have the BCS and conference championship games/bowl placements so intertwined? As a Pac-12 guy displaced in Big 10 country, I am less than thrilled to see the inaugural championship game star 6-6 UCLA. And I'm downright terrified of them bottling lightning for one day and catching Oregon on a bad one to wind up in the Rose Bowl. Surely I'm not alone. If the BCS was built with the intent of pitting the two best teams against one another for the national championship, then why do we still allow it to play such a factor in the conference championships/bowl game placements?
Ted Miller: The BCS's chief intent is to match the two best teams without resorting to a playoff which, clearly would cause us to have the worst economic collapse since 1929. (Oh, right, never mind).
It includes a human element, as in, "Hmmm... I think these are the two best teams based on what my eyes have told me (and... shhh... my personal biases)." And there is a computer element, as in, "Bleep, gurgle, ones and zeroes, ones and zeroes... bleep... bleep... Alabama and Wichita State!"
But let's look at how things stack up in your question, starting with the Pac-12 championship. Yes, it doesn't look like much of a game, but the Ducks are fully aware of the deal. Lose to a 6-6 team and then their rear ends will be parked in front of the TV watching the Bruins play the Big Ten champions in the Rose Bowl.
The solution: Don't lose, Oregon.
As for the SEC championship, if LSU loses to Georgia, the question will be simple. Who are the two best teams? Why do we -- and the computers -- think that? Who most deserves a shot at the national title based on their totality of work?
There won't be a correct answer. There will only be the answer our present system provides, and no matter the answer somebody will be outraged at the injustice of it all. And, yes, the likely matchup still would be "LSU-Alabama II: Revenge of the Punters!"
But let's keep this in mind: One of the joys -- and frustrations -- of the NCAA basketball tournament is its upsets and unpredictability. Many of us love the upsets. And then we get to the final and sort of think, gosh, I wish Kansas and North Carolina were playing.
College football at present has this X-factor formula -- the BCS -- that is superimposed on top of the actual field of play. It's a strange and unique and controversial thing. College football fans have to pay attention to perception and process more than fans of any other sport. It's its own sort of theater. Or theater of the absurd, if you will.
Let me put it this way: The BCS is an inferior option to a playoff, though anti-playoff folks do make some reasonable points. But it also is superior to the old bowl system which rarely matched two teams that were even in the national championship discussion on New Year's Day.
Matt from Wilsonville, Ore., writes: I have been an avid Duck fan for years and I love watching their offense do their thing. Obviously over the past couple of years, they have been great running the ball, but they couldn't do that without a good passing game to complement that. I have noticed that when teams are able to slow the run against the Ducks (Auburn, LSU, USC), that they obviously don't fare so well. Do you think that the Ducks need to start passing the ball more to force the opposing defenses to play the pass which then would open up more running lanes? When the Ducks made their comeback against USC this year in the fourth quarter, I noticed a lot of passing which yielded success. What is your take on the Oregon offense?
Ted Miller: I actually think Chip Kelly does a good job at figuring out what a defense is giving him. Recall that the Ducks passed for 374 yards against Auburn because the Tigers ganged up on the run and defensive tackle Nick Fairley was a disruptive force in the interior. And Oregon rushed for 209 yards against USC. Below its season average, yes, but they did that despite falling behind 21-7 at halftime and 38-14 in the third quarter.
One of the things to keep in mind when we dissect Oregon's small handful of losses under Chip Kelly: They've all come against good teams. Boise State, Ohio State and LSU all had elite defenses that were given extra time to prepare. My perception after covering college football a few years is that extra prep time favors a defense, because coaches get more practices to drill into their players heads their keys and assignments. Defenders who have received extra practice repetitions against the Ducks' pace and misdirection are going to be more confident and disciplined. That means fewer creases due to freelancing defenders biting on a fake. That means a sounder scheme. And if said players have NFL talent -- like everybody on the LSU defense -- they are going to cause problems.
That's my usual blather. Let me conclude with this: Until teams start to consistently figure out Kelly's offense, I'm not going to pretend to have any useful advice for a guy who might be one of the best offensive minds in college coaching in a generation.
But I do expect a call from Kelly -- "Ted, what is wrong with me!?" -- if things start to slide. At which point, I will open my "Magic Book of Sports Writing Smartness" and tell him to throw to the tight end more.
And, no, you can't see my "Magic Book of Sports Writing Smartness." You'd have to pass through the "12 Labors of Jim Murray" first, and I wouldn't recommend that if you don't want to anger the gods and/or get a serious case of carpal tunnel syndrome.
"Mike Riley" from Corvallis, Ore., writes: Am I [Oregon State coach Mike Riley] on the hot-seat because Mike Leach is at WAZZU? I make my living finding hidden talent. Leach made his living finding hidden talent in Texas that Texas, a&m and Oklahoma didn't want. I found the Rodger's brothers in Texas and brought them to the NW, but will WSU now find these types?
Ted Miller: The hiring of Mike Leach at Washington State just made the Pac-12 North tougher, and the Northwest far more hotly contested. My guess is, yes, Kelly, Steve Sarkisian and, you, Coach Riley, at least raised an eyebrow.
And, yes, the Beavers coach will be on the hotseat in 2012. A third consecutive losing season could threaten a guy who was among the most secure coaches in college football just two years ago, particularly if the Cougars perk up, the Huskies win eight or nine games and Oregon continues to go to BCS bowl games.
Things are changing in the Pac-12. With more TV money, the conference can be more competitive with coaching salaries. That means not coming in second for a guy like Leach or Rich Rodriguez. It will be interesting to see if a conference team can snag Kevin Sumlin away from Houston, instead of getting out-fancied by SEC-bound Texas A&M. That certainly would announce that the conference has more than one or two destination jobs.
Robert from Tucson writes: I have a favor to ask. You may have heard of the "Crazy Lady" at Utah home games. She dances in front of the band between the 3rd and 4th quarters. The athletic department is considering cutting her "stage." This would be a travesty. The MUSS loves her!! Could you help out by maybe posting the SLTrib article about her in your Lunch Links?
Ted Miller: Occupy the Crazy Lady?
Utah, save the Crazy Lady.
Marketing departments don't create college football traditions. When they try, they come up with bad ideas that get ridiculed. (Cackle, cackle, says me).
I'm already imagining this from Lya Wodraska in 2015, under the headline: "Curses of the 'Crazy Lady'?"
Beware Utah. Beware.
Click here to join a fabulous journey.
To the notes.
Jeremy from Hastings, Neb., writes: Oh, my head. Right now, we are one fluke away from a Rose Bowl that includes a 7-6 UCLA team and a national championship game including two teams that did not win their conference. (Should Georgia pull off the upset, it is entirely possible voters still see it fit to put LSU against Alabama though neither team will have won the SEC.) My question is this. Is it really in the best interest of all involved to have the BCS and conference championship games/bowl placements so intertwined? As a Pac-12 guy displaced in Big 10 country, I am less than thrilled to see the inaugural championship game star 6-6 UCLA. And I'm downright terrified of them bottling lightning for one day and catching Oregon on a bad one to wind up in the Rose Bowl. Surely I'm not alone. If the BCS was built with the intent of pitting the two best teams against one another for the national championship, then why do we still allow it to play such a factor in the conference championships/bowl game placements?
Ted Miller: The BCS's chief intent is to match the two best teams without resorting to a playoff which, clearly would cause us to have the worst economic collapse since 1929. (Oh, right, never mind).
It includes a human element, as in, "Hmmm... I think these are the two best teams based on what my eyes have told me (and... shhh... my personal biases)." And there is a computer element, as in, "Bleep, gurgle, ones and zeroes, ones and zeroes... bleep... bleep... Alabama and Wichita State!"
But let's look at how things stack up in your question, starting with the Pac-12 championship. Yes, it doesn't look like much of a game, but the Ducks are fully aware of the deal. Lose to a 6-6 team and then their rear ends will be parked in front of the TV watching the Bruins play the Big Ten champions in the Rose Bowl.
The solution: Don't lose, Oregon.
As for the SEC championship, if LSU loses to Georgia, the question will be simple. Who are the two best teams? Why do we -- and the computers -- think that? Who most deserves a shot at the national title based on their totality of work?
There won't be a correct answer. There will only be the answer our present system provides, and no matter the answer somebody will be outraged at the injustice of it all. And, yes, the likely matchup still would be "LSU-Alabama II: Revenge of the Punters!"
But let's keep this in mind: One of the joys -- and frustrations -- of the NCAA basketball tournament is its upsets and unpredictability. Many of us love the upsets. And then we get to the final and sort of think, gosh, I wish Kansas and North Carolina were playing.
College football at present has this X-factor formula -- the BCS -- that is superimposed on top of the actual field of play. It's a strange and unique and controversial thing. College football fans have to pay attention to perception and process more than fans of any other sport. It's its own sort of theater. Or theater of the absurd, if you will.
Let me put it this way: The BCS is an inferior option to a playoff, though anti-playoff folks do make some reasonable points. But it also is superior to the old bowl system which rarely matched two teams that were even in the national championship discussion on New Year's Day.
Matt from Wilsonville, Ore., writes: I have been an avid Duck fan for years and I love watching their offense do their thing. Obviously over the past couple of years, they have been great running the ball, but they couldn't do that without a good passing game to complement that. I have noticed that when teams are able to slow the run against the Ducks (Auburn, LSU, USC), that they obviously don't fare so well. Do you think that the Ducks need to start passing the ball more to force the opposing defenses to play the pass which then would open up more running lanes? When the Ducks made their comeback against USC this year in the fourth quarter, I noticed a lot of passing which yielded success. What is your take on the Oregon offense?
Ted Miller: I actually think Chip Kelly does a good job at figuring out what a defense is giving him. Recall that the Ducks passed for 374 yards against Auburn because the Tigers ganged up on the run and defensive tackle Nick Fairley was a disruptive force in the interior. And Oregon rushed for 209 yards against USC. Below its season average, yes, but they did that despite falling behind 21-7 at halftime and 38-14 in the third quarter.
One of the things to keep in mind when we dissect Oregon's small handful of losses under Chip Kelly: They've all come against good teams. Boise State, Ohio State and LSU all had elite defenses that were given extra time to prepare. My perception after covering college football a few years is that extra prep time favors a defense, because coaches get more practices to drill into their players heads their keys and assignments. Defenders who have received extra practice repetitions against the Ducks' pace and misdirection are going to be more confident and disciplined. That means fewer creases due to freelancing defenders biting on a fake. That means a sounder scheme. And if said players have NFL talent -- like everybody on the LSU defense -- they are going to cause problems.
That's my usual blather. Let me conclude with this: Until teams start to consistently figure out Kelly's offense, I'm not going to pretend to have any useful advice for a guy who might be one of the best offensive minds in college coaching in a generation.
But I do expect a call from Kelly -- "Ted, what is wrong with me!?" -- if things start to slide. At which point, I will open my "Magic Book of Sports Writing Smartness" and tell him to throw to the tight end more.
And, no, you can't see my "Magic Book of Sports Writing Smartness." You'd have to pass through the "12 Labors of Jim Murray" first, and I wouldn't recommend that if you don't want to anger the gods and/or get a serious case of carpal tunnel syndrome.
"Mike Riley" from Corvallis, Ore., writes: Am I [Oregon State coach Mike Riley] on the hot-seat because Mike Leach is at WAZZU? I make my living finding hidden talent. Leach made his living finding hidden talent in Texas that Texas, a&m and Oklahoma didn't want. I found the Rodger's brothers in Texas and brought them to the NW, but will WSU now find these types?
Ted Miller: The hiring of Mike Leach at Washington State just made the Pac-12 North tougher, and the Northwest far more hotly contested. My guess is, yes, Kelly, Steve Sarkisian and, you, Coach Riley, at least raised an eyebrow.
And, yes, the Beavers coach will be on the hotseat in 2012. A third consecutive losing season could threaten a guy who was among the most secure coaches in college football just two years ago, particularly if the Cougars perk up, the Huskies win eight or nine games and Oregon continues to go to BCS bowl games.
Things are changing in the Pac-12. With more TV money, the conference can be more competitive with coaching salaries. That means not coming in second for a guy like Leach or Rich Rodriguez. It will be interesting to see if a conference team can snag Kevin Sumlin away from Houston, instead of getting out-fancied by SEC-bound Texas A&M. That certainly would announce that the conference has more than one or two destination jobs.
Robert from Tucson writes: I have a favor to ask. You may have heard of the "Crazy Lady" at Utah home games. She dances in front of the band between the 3rd and 4th quarters. The athletic department is considering cutting her "stage." This would be a travesty. The MUSS loves her!! Could you help out by maybe posting the SLTrib article about her in your Lunch Links?
Ted Miller: Occupy the Crazy Lady?
Utah, save the Crazy Lady.
Marketing departments don't create college football traditions. When they try, they come up with bad ideas that get ridiculed. (Cackle, cackle, says me).
I'm already imagining this from Lya Wodraska in 2015, under the headline: "Curses of the 'Crazy Lady'?"
Utah fans are not superstitious sorts, but the Utes four-year streak without a bowl game has many asking if yanking the beloved Crazy Lady in 2012 in favor of "Otis the Giant Red Blob of Overthinking Marketing Stupid" was a bad idea.
"I'm not going to say that we're cursed because of Crazy Lady's removal, but you did notice that a meteor fell from the sky and onto our running back just as he was about to score the winning touchdown against BYU, didn't you?" Utes normally level-headed coach Kyle Whittingham said. "Or that somehow Matt Barkley has been USC's quarterback for seven seasons because of that mysterious "Just Because" ruling from the NCAA? Or that all of our of offensive linemen are asking me if their new skinny jeans make their butts look big?"
Beware Utah. Beware.
In the mailbag: What if Georgia wins SEC?
November, 18, 2011
11/18/11
5:30
PM ET
By
Ted Miller | ESPN.com
Happy Friday.
Follow me on Twitter.
To 'ze notes!
Andy from Bend, Ore., writes: It seems that no one is mentioning their thoughts on the outcome of a scenario in which Georgia wins the SEC championship game. This doesn't seem too far fetched in that Georgia is demonstrating its ability to score and defend. Much like the Ducks, they appear to be getting better each week. While LSU, with it sharing time at the QB position, appears to have possibly peaked. Assuming LSU and Alabama win out (regular season) and Georgia wins the SEC championship matchup, what happens to the National Championship matchup?
Ted Miller: If Georgia beats LSU for the SEC title, Georgia would go to the Sugar Bowl, and it would be left up to the BCS standings to make the national championship matchup. And it would be a heck of a quandary.
Oklahoma State, if still undefeated, would be one team. Then it would come down to a showdown of one-loss teams between Alabama, LSU and Oregon.
How would the polls react? How would the computers react? Hard to say.
My first inclination, based on how difficult LSU's schedule has been -- with wins over Oregon, West Virginia, Alabama and Arkansas -- would be that LSU still would play for the title, even if it lost to Georgia in the SEC championship game.
But I called SEC blogger Chris Low to see what he thought, and he sagely noted that then we'd be acting like the SEC championship game never happened. Which, you know, would be hard to do because SEC folks talk about their SEC championship A LOT.
There's also something about a team losing its last game -- failing on a big stage -- with so much at stake.
But, if Alabama or Oregon went to the title game, we'd be ignoring LSU's superior body of work, which -- oh, by the way -- included head-to-head wins over the Crimson Tide and Ducks.
I called ESPN's BCS guru Brad Edwards, and he also favored LSU's chances. But he noted plenty of variables, such as how teams play down the stretch as well as the margin of victory in Atlanta.
"This is a long way of saying, I don't know," Edwards concluded.
So that's what I'm saying: There is no right call on this one. It would be a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. And very BCSed.
Ryan from Salt Lake City writes: How do you think Chip Kelly, David Shaw and Lane Kiffin would be doing if they were missing Darron Thomas, Andrew Luck and Matt Barkley, respectively? Not too well, I'd imagine. For Utah to be 6-4 with Jon Hays at QB says something about Kyle Whittingham. If Utah goes 8-4 I don't see how you can say that any of the above mentioned coaches deserves to be COY over Coach Whit. Do you disagree?
Ted Miller: I don't think anyone doubts Kyle Whittingham as a head coach. He's proven. Heck, he's beaten Alabama in the freaking Sugar Bowl. And it's admirable that he's stuck around when other, perhaps "bigger" programs came calling.
The Utes' surge also has been impressive. They went from 0-4 in the Pac-12 to rejoining the South Division race. And if the Utes end up winning the South at 8-4 overall, and Oregon and Stanford lose again, I'd say Whittingham would be a good choice for Pac-12 coach of the year.
That said, some of Utah's success this season is due to scheduling. Utah doesn't play either Oregon or Stanford, and its last three wins were over Oregon State, Arizona -- both 2-8 -- and UCLA at home in the snow. The Bruins' only road win was at Oregon State.
That said, take II: Let's not overstate that, either. This three-game winning streak also sets the Utes up in the conference ahead of three quality programs. That "Utah is getting exposed!" talk from a month ago, you might have noticed, has been significantly muted of late.
Tom from Phoenix writes: My question: if UCLA, ASU, and Utah lose their final two games, who represents the Pac-12 South in the title game? Technically, UCLA should go because it would be tied with ASU at 4-5 in the conference and won the head-to-head matchup. But the Bruins would also be 5-7, so if they won the title game they would be 6-7 and still not eligible for a bowl (I think). I know this scenario is extremely unlikely, but as a U of A fan, I don't have any bowl scenarios for my own team to occupy my time.
Ted Miller: If UCLA, Arizona State and Utah all lose their final two games, UCLA would go to the Pac-12 title game at 5-7.
If the Bruins upset the North Champion, they would be Pac-12 champions. Yes, with a losing record. And, in order to go to the Rose Bowl, the conference office would have to apply to the NCAA for a waiver that would allow the Bruins to play.
Also, in that scenario, if the Bruins lost the title game and finished 5-8, they would not go to a bowl game.
And, yes, if any of this came to pass, commissioner Larry Scott would be most unhappy.
Mason from Atlanta writes: In your opinion, would you rather see an Oregon-LSU rematch or an Alabama-LSU rematch and why? That is, if Oklahoma State were to lose along the way.
Ted Miller: I'd rather see Oregon-LSU.
I type that as the Pac-12 blogger. If I were the SEC blogger, I'd probably type LSU-Alabama.
But, as a college football fan, I'd rather see Oregon-LSU. While a lot of folks sold LSU's 9-6 overtime win as being all about dominant defense, it was at least 30 percent about poor, unimaginative offense. I suspect a rematch would look much the same, while I don't think Oregon-LSU would.
Still, if Oregon and Alabama were to play on a neutral field on Saturday, I'd pick Alabama to win. Just as I'd pick LSU to win a rematch.
Of course, if Oregon dominates USC on Saturday and then rolls through Oregon State and the Pac-12 championship game in overwhelming, ludicrous speed fashion, I -- and lots of other folks -- might change my mind, which might mean a Ducks promotion in the human polls.
Victor from Eugene, Ore., writes: I think every Duck fan should be lobbying and fighting for a playoff in college football. I say this because of what people say about their recent losses under Chip: other teams have too much time to prepare for the offense. Now if the system had a playoff where you can't create a plan to slow the Ducks offense for five weeks, then Oregon would have a better chance to win against good teams from other conferences. They might instead have to prepare for other teams to play, and only have a week or two to get ready, which is still better odds then five weeks. Would you concur?
Ted Miller: Makes sense, considering that Chip Kelly is 31-5 in two-plus seasons and no team has beaten him without at least two weeks to prepare. And four of those five came with at least a month to prepare.
But don't hold your breath on a playoff, particularly one that goes on over multiple weeks like the NFL.
Grant from Eugene, Ore., writes: Don't you think when a guy and his brother make a bet to see who can appear in a Bill Simmons or Pac-12 mailbag first, and the guy does appear in a Bill Simmons mailbag, the brother should honor that bet and not pretend like the bet was only about the Pac-12 mailbag? Don't you think?
Ted Miller: If I had a dollar for everyone who made this bet, I'd like have ... a dollar.
You should honor your bets. Or this guy will come after you.
Follow me on Twitter.
To 'ze notes!
Andy from Bend, Ore., writes: It seems that no one is mentioning their thoughts on the outcome of a scenario in which Georgia wins the SEC championship game. This doesn't seem too far fetched in that Georgia is demonstrating its ability to score and defend. Much like the Ducks, they appear to be getting better each week. While LSU, with it sharing time at the QB position, appears to have possibly peaked. Assuming LSU and Alabama win out (regular season) and Georgia wins the SEC championship matchup, what happens to the National Championship matchup?
Ted Miller: If Georgia beats LSU for the SEC title, Georgia would go to the Sugar Bowl, and it would be left up to the BCS standings to make the national championship matchup. And it would be a heck of a quandary.
Oklahoma State, if still undefeated, would be one team. Then it would come down to a showdown of one-loss teams between Alabama, LSU and Oregon.
How would the polls react? How would the computers react? Hard to say.
My first inclination, based on how difficult LSU's schedule has been -- with wins over Oregon, West Virginia, Alabama and Arkansas -- would be that LSU still would play for the title, even if it lost to Georgia in the SEC championship game.
But I called SEC blogger Chris Low to see what he thought, and he sagely noted that then we'd be acting like the SEC championship game never happened. Which, you know, would be hard to do because SEC folks talk about their SEC championship A LOT.
There's also something about a team losing its last game -- failing on a big stage -- with so much at stake.
But, if Alabama or Oregon went to the title game, we'd be ignoring LSU's superior body of work, which -- oh, by the way -- included head-to-head wins over the Crimson Tide and Ducks.
I called ESPN's BCS guru Brad Edwards, and he also favored LSU's chances. But he noted plenty of variables, such as how teams play down the stretch as well as the margin of victory in Atlanta.
"This is a long way of saying, I don't know," Edwards concluded.
So that's what I'm saying: There is no right call on this one. It would be a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. And very BCSed.
Ryan from Salt Lake City writes: How do you think Chip Kelly, David Shaw and Lane Kiffin would be doing if they were missing Darron Thomas, Andrew Luck and Matt Barkley, respectively? Not too well, I'd imagine. For Utah to be 6-4 with Jon Hays at QB says something about Kyle Whittingham. If Utah goes 8-4 I don't see how you can say that any of the above mentioned coaches deserves to be COY over Coach Whit. Do you disagree?
Ted Miller: I don't think anyone doubts Kyle Whittingham as a head coach. He's proven. Heck, he's beaten Alabama in the freaking Sugar Bowl. And it's admirable that he's stuck around when other, perhaps "bigger" programs came calling.
The Utes' surge also has been impressive. They went from 0-4 in the Pac-12 to rejoining the South Division race. And if the Utes end up winning the South at 8-4 overall, and Oregon and Stanford lose again, I'd say Whittingham would be a good choice for Pac-12 coach of the year.
That said, some of Utah's success this season is due to scheduling. Utah doesn't play either Oregon or Stanford, and its last three wins were over Oregon State, Arizona -- both 2-8 -- and UCLA at home in the snow. The Bruins' only road win was at Oregon State.
That said, take II: Let's not overstate that, either. This three-game winning streak also sets the Utes up in the conference ahead of three quality programs. That "Utah is getting exposed!" talk from a month ago, you might have noticed, has been significantly muted of late.
Tom from Phoenix writes: My question: if UCLA, ASU, and Utah lose their final two games, who represents the Pac-12 South in the title game? Technically, UCLA should go because it would be tied with ASU at 4-5 in the conference and won the head-to-head matchup. But the Bruins would also be 5-7, so if they won the title game they would be 6-7 and still not eligible for a bowl (I think). I know this scenario is extremely unlikely, but as a U of A fan, I don't have any bowl scenarios for my own team to occupy my time.
Ted Miller: If UCLA, Arizona State and Utah all lose their final two games, UCLA would go to the Pac-12 title game at 5-7.
If the Bruins upset the North Champion, they would be Pac-12 champions. Yes, with a losing record. And, in order to go to the Rose Bowl, the conference office would have to apply to the NCAA for a waiver that would allow the Bruins to play.
Also, in that scenario, if the Bruins lost the title game and finished 5-8, they would not go to a bowl game.
And, yes, if any of this came to pass, commissioner Larry Scott would be most unhappy.
Mason from Atlanta writes: In your opinion, would you rather see an Oregon-LSU rematch or an Alabama-LSU rematch and why? That is, if Oklahoma State were to lose along the way.
Ted Miller: I'd rather see Oregon-LSU.
I type that as the Pac-12 blogger. If I were the SEC blogger, I'd probably type LSU-Alabama.
But, as a college football fan, I'd rather see Oregon-LSU. While a lot of folks sold LSU's 9-6 overtime win as being all about dominant defense, it was at least 30 percent about poor, unimaginative offense. I suspect a rematch would look much the same, while I don't think Oregon-LSU would.
Still, if Oregon and Alabama were to play on a neutral field on Saturday, I'd pick Alabama to win. Just as I'd pick LSU to win a rematch.
Of course, if Oregon dominates USC on Saturday and then rolls through Oregon State and the Pac-12 championship game in overwhelming, ludicrous speed fashion, I -- and lots of other folks -- might change my mind, which might mean a Ducks promotion in the human polls.
Victor from Eugene, Ore., writes: I think every Duck fan should be lobbying and fighting for a playoff in college football. I say this because of what people say about their recent losses under Chip: other teams have too much time to prepare for the offense. Now if the system had a playoff where you can't create a plan to slow the Ducks offense for five weeks, then Oregon would have a better chance to win against good teams from other conferences. They might instead have to prepare for other teams to play, and only have a week or two to get ready, which is still better odds then five weeks. Would you concur?
Ted Miller: Makes sense, considering that Chip Kelly is 31-5 in two-plus seasons and no team has beaten him without at least two weeks to prepare. And four of those five came with at least a month to prepare.
But don't hold your breath on a playoff, particularly one that goes on over multiple weeks like the NFL.
Grant from Eugene, Ore., writes: Don't you think when a guy and his brother make a bet to see who can appear in a Bill Simmons or Pac-12 mailbag first, and the guy does appear in a Bill Simmons mailbag, the brother should honor that bet and not pretend like the bet was only about the Pac-12 mailbag? Don't you think?
Ted Miller: If I had a dollar for everyone who made this bet, I'd like have ... a dollar.
You should honor your bets. Or this guy will come after you.
Oregon back in title discussion (sort of)
November, 13, 2011
11/13/11
11:00
AM ET
By
Ted Miller | ESPN.com
Oregon is still a longshot to get into the BCS national championship game, but its 53-30 win against Stanford at least puts it back in the discussion.
And as we all know with BCS discussions before the final click of the season, the conclusion is always, "But you never know."
At the very least we can say this: Oregon seems to be peaking and is well-positioned to be the top-seed out of the Pac-12. That means the Rose Bowl. Or the title game.
The Ducks, first of all, will need to end their celebration quickly. USC comes to Eugene on Saturday playing like a top-10 team. It stomped Washington 40-17 over the weekend and its only loss in the past six games was the triple-overtime defeat to Stanford.
But if Oregon manages to beat USC and then Oregon State, it will win the North Division -- it actually can split those two and still win the North, but no matter -- and then play a patsy from the South Division, which is an embarrassment and likely to produce a "champion" with at least four losses that will be looking up at the ineligible Trojans in the standings. Not what commissioner Larry Scott wanted.
Then, at 12-1 after delivering a butt-kicking in the Dec. 2 Pac-12 title game, Oregon would wait. And hope.
Above all else that comes before it, the Ducks need unbeaten Oklahoma State to lose. The Cowboys are at Iowa State on Friday and then they play host to Oklahoma on Dec. 3. If the Cowboys go down, that would open up the debate: Who is the best 1-loss team?
The top contenders would be Oklahoma, Alabama and Oregon. Maybe.
The SEC is the first major problem. If Alabama and LSU win out and Oklahoma State loses, most BCS standings watchers believe Alabama would eclipse Oregon. But what if Alabama loses at arch-rival Auburn on Nov. 26? That would give the Ducks a big boost.
Then Oklahoma could be a road block. If the Sooners, despite major injuries, beat the Cowboys, they'd have a pretty strong case, too. Of course, the Sooners lost at home to Texas Tech. The Ducks to No. 1 LSU. It would be up to voters. And computers.
The Ducks could use the Sooners going belly-up at home against Iowa State on Nov. 26. Just saying.
Variables? What about this: What if Arkansas wins at LSU on Nov. 25? The Razorbacks, whose only loss was to Alabama, are an SEC team with an offensive pulse. They might be able to score a few on the Tigers. A three-way tie atop the SEC West with Alabama, LSU and Arkansas would be decided by the BCS standings.
Then what if the West champ loses to the East Champ (Georgia) in the SEC championship game?
Yes, it makes your head spin. The ultimate conclusion, however, is this: If Oregon takes care of its business, its most likely destination after a third consecutive conference title is the Rose Bowl opposite the Big Ten champion. Not exactly a trip to Rikers Island or anything.
There are a lot of buttons -- too many it seems -- that need to be pressed for Oregon to end up opposite LSU for a second time this season in the BCS title game on Jan. 9 in New Orleans.
Unlikely. But not impossible.
[+] Enlarge
Jason O. Watson/US PresswireCoach Chip Kelly has his Oregon team back in the hunt for the national championship.
Jason O. Watson/US PresswireCoach Chip Kelly has his Oregon team back in the hunt for the national championship.At the very least we can say this: Oregon seems to be peaking and is well-positioned to be the top-seed out of the Pac-12. That means the Rose Bowl. Or the title game.
The Ducks, first of all, will need to end their celebration quickly. USC comes to Eugene on Saturday playing like a top-10 team. It stomped Washington 40-17 over the weekend and its only loss in the past six games was the triple-overtime defeat to Stanford.
But if Oregon manages to beat USC and then Oregon State, it will win the North Division -- it actually can split those two and still win the North, but no matter -- and then play a patsy from the South Division, which is an embarrassment and likely to produce a "champion" with at least four losses that will be looking up at the ineligible Trojans in the standings. Not what commissioner Larry Scott wanted.
Then, at 12-1 after delivering a butt-kicking in the Dec. 2 Pac-12 title game, Oregon would wait. And hope.
Above all else that comes before it, the Ducks need unbeaten Oklahoma State to lose. The Cowboys are at Iowa State on Friday and then they play host to Oklahoma on Dec. 3. If the Cowboys go down, that would open up the debate: Who is the best 1-loss team?
The top contenders would be Oklahoma, Alabama and Oregon. Maybe.
The SEC is the first major problem. If Alabama and LSU win out and Oklahoma State loses, most BCS standings watchers believe Alabama would eclipse Oregon. But what if Alabama loses at arch-rival Auburn on Nov. 26? That would give the Ducks a big boost.
Then Oklahoma could be a road block. If the Sooners, despite major injuries, beat the Cowboys, they'd have a pretty strong case, too. Of course, the Sooners lost at home to Texas Tech. The Ducks to No. 1 LSU. It would be up to voters. And computers.
The Ducks could use the Sooners going belly-up at home against Iowa State on Nov. 26. Just saying.
Variables? What about this: What if Arkansas wins at LSU on Nov. 25? The Razorbacks, whose only loss was to Alabama, are an SEC team with an offensive pulse. They might be able to score a few on the Tigers. A three-way tie atop the SEC West with Alabama, LSU and Arkansas would be decided by the BCS standings.
Then what if the West champ loses to the East Champ (Georgia) in the SEC championship game?
Yes, it makes your head spin. The ultimate conclusion, however, is this: If Oregon takes care of its business, its most likely destination after a third consecutive conference title is the Rose Bowl opposite the Big Ten champion. Not exactly a trip to Rikers Island or anything.
There are a lot of buttons -- too many it seems -- that need to be pressed for Oregon to end up opposite LSU for a second time this season in the BCS title game on Jan. 9 in New Orleans.
Unlikely. But not impossible.
The week that wasn't. The week that might be.
Welcome to "Measuring Stick Week" for the Pac-12, which comes right on the heels of "Mostly Laid an Egg Week" in the Pac-12.
To recap:
One word: Yuck.
But if you lay an egg, you can always pick it up and make an omelet. (Preferably with real butter. And some cheese.)
Measuring Stick Week offers plenty of opportunities for redemption. Or, if you want to be a negative-Nelly, for a precipitous slide in national esteem. (Here's a quick preview of the games).
Pac-12 teams are underdogs in only two of these nonconference games: Arizona and Oregon State (by two and three TDs, respectively). That means the conference needs to go at least 6-2 to hold serve. That means Arizona State -- a 7.5-point favorite even though Missouri is ranked -- and Washington need to beat good teams at home. And Oregon, Stanford, Washington State and UCLA need to take care of business against double-digit underdogs.
And it wouldn't hurt if the Wildcats and Beavers at least distinguished themselves with competitive performances on the road.
The reaction to the Pac-12's first weekend of games was bad from the national media. You can see some here. And here.
You might find it unfair that few took note of the SEC suffering a few embarrassing performances, too, with Georgia getting outclassed by Boise State in a glorified home game and Ole Miss going down at home to BYU and Auburn just escaping Utah State. But that conference, as its adherents are known to point out, has won five consecutive national titles.
The Pac-12 needs more teams in the Top 25 to burnish its image. If Arizona State and Washington win this week, the Sun Devils will be in and the Huskies will be close. The Utah-USC winner will be ranked, while the Wildcats would be too if they pull the upset.
College football is often more of a beauty contest than a game contested on the field of play. The Pac-12 made big news this offseason by getting rich. That's why it has so many suitors now who want a piece of the action.
Being rich makes you attractive in our society.
But the Pac-12 would rather be George Clooney -- rich, good looking -- rather than T. Boone Pickens -- rich and wrinkled.
It figures to become one or the other when the smoke clears after Measuring Stick Week.
Welcome to "Measuring Stick Week" for the Pac-12, which comes right on the heels of "Mostly Laid an Egg Week" in the Pac-12.
To recap:
- The conference went 8-4 when 12-0 seemed perfectly reasonable to expect.
- Oregon lost its marquee showdown with LSU. The nation is saying it was because the Tigers bullied the Ducks with their super-superior angry robot players. Seems completely reasonable, of course, to ignore four Ducks turnovers and 12 Ducks penalties. Sure that had nothing to do with it.
- Oregon State lost at home to Sacramento State, which is not only an FCS team, it's a mediocre FCS team.
- UCLA lost at Houston, a team it pushed around a year ago.
- Colorado lost the battle on the line of scrimmage at Hawaii.
- Even the teams that did win didn't do so with distinction: Washington needed a late interception to beat Eastern Washington. Utah most certainly did NOT just barely beat Montana State -- that's for you angry Twitter sorts -- but it looked terrible on offense against Montana State. USC went scoreless in the second half and also needed a late interception to beat Minnesota.
- And in, "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?" news, Washington State's price for manhandling Idaho State was quarterback Jeff Tuel's clavicle.
One word: Yuck.
But if you lay an egg, you can always pick it up and make an omelet. (Preferably with real butter. And some cheese.)
Measuring Stick Week offers plenty of opportunities for redemption. Or, if you want to be a negative-Nelly, for a precipitous slide in national esteem. (Here's a quick preview of the games).
- Instead of FCS foes, games include matchups with three ranked teams from other AQ conferences -- two on the road -- and two games against foes from non-AQ conferences that had double-digit wins in 2010 (Nevada and Hawaii).
- There are two conference games, though only one counts as a conferences game. Utah's visit to USC not only counts in the standings, it will be widely viewed as an early measure of the Utes' place in the conference pecking order. California's visit to Colorado stands as a nonconference game -- it was scheduled before expansion -- and is all about the Buffs hoping to redeem themselves for the disaster in Berkeley last year.
- Stanford and UCLA are heavy favorites against Duke and San Jose State, respectively, but Stanford is traveling 2,800 miles to Durham, while it's never certain what the Bruins will do.
- Can Washington State improve to 2-0 for the first time since 2005 at home against UNLV without its starting QB?
Pac-12 teams are underdogs in only two of these nonconference games: Arizona and Oregon State (by two and three TDs, respectively). That means the conference needs to go at least 6-2 to hold serve. That means Arizona State -- a 7.5-point favorite even though Missouri is ranked -- and Washington need to beat good teams at home. And Oregon, Stanford, Washington State and UCLA need to take care of business against double-digit underdogs.
And it wouldn't hurt if the Wildcats and Beavers at least distinguished themselves with competitive performances on the road.
The reaction to the Pac-12's first weekend of games was bad from the national media. You can see some here. And here.
You might find it unfair that few took note of the SEC suffering a few embarrassing performances, too, with Georgia getting outclassed by Boise State in a glorified home game and Ole Miss going down at home to BYU and Auburn just escaping Utah State. But that conference, as its adherents are known to point out, has won five consecutive national titles.
The Pac-12 needs more teams in the Top 25 to burnish its image. If Arizona State and Washington win this week, the Sun Devils will be in and the Huskies will be close. The Utah-USC winner will be ranked, while the Wildcats would be too if they pull the upset.
College football is often more of a beauty contest than a game contested on the field of play. The Pac-12 made big news this offseason by getting rich. That's why it has so many suitors now who want a piece of the action.
Being rich makes you attractive in our society.
But the Pac-12 would rather be George Clooney -- rich, good looking -- rather than T. Boone Pickens -- rich and wrinkled.
It figures to become one or the other when the smoke clears after Measuring Stick Week.
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
