ESPN College Football

Last week we gave you our thoughts on Pac-12 games we can't wait to see. Obviously, the much-anticipated Nov. 3 Oregon-USC matchup (assuming both teams do what they are supposed to do) is the one that will have all Pac-12 fans drooling. But there are plenty of other potential matchups with major conference implications along the way (or after).

Ted Miller went with Stanford's Sept. 27 trek to Washington in a showdown of second-tier North Division teams. Recent history is on the side of the Cardinal, but Washington is hoping to turn the tide with a revamped defense.

Kevin Gemmell went with the USC's trip to Utah on Oct. 4 -- a pivotal game in the South Division. You've got an A-list offense in USC going against one of the top defensive fronts on the West Coast.

Are those the top two games? Or are there better ones on the horizon you're waiting for?

Washington's trip to Baton Rouge to face LSU on Sept. 8 seems like a pretty good one. You have a Heisman hopeful quarterback against probably the best defense in the country.

How about Stanford's trip to Oregon on Nov. 17? The Cardinal will try to play spoiler while the Ducks will likely be in pursuit of a BCS bowl game.

Then there is Cal's trip to Ohio State on Sept. 15. The Bears haven't had a lot of success when they travel East and Miller tabbed it Cal's most important game of the season.

What's the game you can't wait to see?

Are you a USC fan looking to kill seven minutes before leaving work? Are you a non-USC fan looking for seven minutes to kill before leaving work? Pop in the ear buds and hear ESPN football Analyst Ed Cunningham talking Trojans with Scott Van Pelt.

Cunningham talks about the Trojans recovering from sanctions, Matt Barkley's return and the fact that people need to start cutting Lane Kiffin some slack.

Said Cunningham:

I think it's high-time for people to kind of let his past go. Let what happened in Tennessee and how he ran his mouth and everyone who hates him down in Knoxville and all around the SEC -- let all of that go and start to realize this is a bright young coach. And he's positioned this team to not only win the Pac-12, but if they can get out with just one loss, to potentially be in the BCS national championship game this year.

OK, so it's not all on USC. There's also some interesting talk about Texas and Ohio State -- specifically which one is closer to returning to glory -- and the new SEC-Big 12 bowl game alliance.

Our theme today, as part of our "Love to hate" week at ESPN.com, is "Left in the lurch." This is about coaches who bailed out on a Pac-12 program at an unexpected or awkward time. We're not including Urban Meyer leaving Utah for Florida or Jim Harbaugh leaving Stanford for the San Francisco 49ers because their departures were not unexpected and came only after unprecedented success.

Of course, these situations vary greatly in terms of circumstances and reaction. There aren't many college football jobs out there considered better than one in the Pac-12, so most of the coaches who bailed out on their programs left for the NFL.

But here is a sampling from the Pac-12. Feel free to provide your own thoughts below.

• [+] Enlarge
  AP Photo/Don RyanPete Carroll stunned USC fans when he left after the 2009 season to coach the Seattle Seahawks.
  California got dogged twice. First, after going 10-2 in 1991, Bruce Snyder bailed on the Golden Bears for Arizona State. It's rare for a coach to jump from one conference program to another, and it certainly hurts more. Then, in 1996, Steve Mariucci lasted just one year in Berkeley before jumping aboard with the San Francisco 49ers.
• Dennis Erickson twice left Pac-12 teams for sunnier pastures (at least in theory). After two years at Washington State, Erickson bolted for Miami after the 1988 season. Then, after a strong run at Oregon State from 1999-2002, Erickson left Corvallis for the San Francisco 49ers. He has repeatedly said that was the worst move of his career.
• Dick Vermeil lasted two seasons at UCLA. After going 9-2-1 in 1975 and upsetting No. 1 Ohio State in the Rose Bowl, he left for the Philadelphia Eagles.
• Rick Neuheisel shocked many when he left Colorado for Washington before the 1999 season for a million-dollar contract, which was at the time considered exorbitant. He left behind NCAA sanctions for the Buffaloes and immediately got into trouble with the Huskies. It didn't make folks in Boulder feel any better when the Huskies and Neuheisel swept a home-and-home series over the next two years.

But two departures really stand out.

Don James is on the short list of greatest college football coaches of all time. In 18 seasons at Washington, from 1975 to 1992, he won a national title and four Rose Bowls. He went 153-57-2 (.726) and set a then-record of 98 conference victories. From 1990-92, the Huskies won 22 consecutive games.

He is the Dawgfather.

And that's why many Huskies fans will tell you the lowest moment in program history is when he resigned in protest of NCAA and Pac-12 sanctions on Aug. 22, 1993. (James really, really didn't like Washington president William Gerberding and athletic director Barbara Hedges, either).

His resignation just before the season forced Washington to promote defensive coordinator Jim Lambright, a good man and a good defensive coordinator but not an ideal fit as head coach. Other than a Rose Bowl victory after the 2000 season under Rick Neuheisel, things have never been the same in Husky Stadium. Not yet, at least.

A more recent shocker: Pete Carroll bolting USC after the 2009 season for the Seattle Seahawks.

Carroll's hiring in 2001 was widely panned, but all he did thereafter was build a college football dynasty, winning national championships in 2003 and 2004 and falling just short of a third consecutive title in 2005 in a thrilling loss to Texas. He went 97-19 (.836) in nine seasons (11-2 versus rivals Notre Dame and UCLA), won six BCS bowl games and finished ranked in the AP top-four seven times. He won 34 consecutive games from 2003-05 and coached three Heisman Trophy winners and 25 first-team All-Americans.

So, yeah, he accomplished a lot. And many thought he would coach USC for life, though many others also suspected the lure of the NFL would prove too much.

It was the timing of his sudden, stunning departure that frustrated many Trojans fans. While Carroll has repeatedly denied oncoming NCAA sanctions had anything to do with his decision to leave, that's a hard line to buy. He skipped town after a 9-4 season that featured blowout losses to Stanford and Oregon and left behind a team with a two-year bowl ban and deficit of 30 scholarships over three seasons.

Still, not unlike how James is viewed by Huskies fans, Carroll is mostly spared the wrath of Trojans fans because of what he accomplished.

There's no question, however, that both programs were left in the lurch.

Happy Friday.

This is where you follow me on Twitter.

To the notes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

Ted Miller: No.

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

---

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

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

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

---

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

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

---

Every game counts. But some games count more. Or tell us more.

We're going through the Pac-12 and picking out one game that seems most important -- or potentially most revealing -- for each team from our vantage point today.

We're going in alphabetical order.

California

Most important game: at Ohio State, Sept. 15

Why it's important: While a midseason Big Game against Bay Area rival Stanford would be the obvious choice -- particularly one in newly remodeled Memorial Stadium -- we're going to be contrarian. Our starting point is this: When was the last time the Bears won an, er, big game on the road? You could say perhaps the win at Stanford in 2009 counts, but driving an hour or so south hardly qualifies as a road trip. By our calculations, it was 2007, when the Bears nipped Oregon 31-24 in an Autzen Stadium thriller (a really, really entertaining game). That was back when everyone thought Jeff Tedford was one of the nation's best coaches and Nate Longshore was a sure-thing NFL prospect. Do Cal fans recall what happened next? I'm a little fuzzy. Ranked No. 2, about to jump to No. 1 after LSU lost. Oregon State in Strawberry Canyon. Kevin Riley's scramble. Tedford's infuriated stomp! OK, no need to go on (losing six of seven!). You could make the case that victory in Eugene hardly served a positive purpose, seeing what happened thereafter, but sometimes big wins are springboards into someplace other than the abyss. You know: Like a good season. Winning at the Horseshoe, one of the toughest places to play in the nation, would make a significant statement, nationally as well as within the Pac-12. If the Bears are able to beat a vulnerable but likely nationally ranked Ohio State squad, they almost certainly would take a 3-0 record and their own national ranking to USC the next weekend. The Bears would start the Pac-12 schedule with confidence. Quarterback Zach Maynard would have a marquee road win under his belt. The fanbase would stop wringing its hands over Tedford's hotseat and start imagining the program getting back on track. Even if the Bears lost to the Trojans, three winnable conference games follow before Stanford comes to town. Facing the Cardinal at 6-1 would make the Big Game worthy of its name. But a loss at Ohio State, particularly a lopsided one -- think horrible trips east against Tennessee and Maryland -- would add pressure to the visit to the Coliseum, where good things have not happened for the Bears of late. At 2-2, the leading topic among Bears fans would be Tedford's future. That would not be the case at 3-1 with a win over Urban Meyer.

The Big Ten is holding its spring meetings in Chicago this week, and it appears the thinking among administrators is in line with what the Pac-12 athletic directors and commissioner Larry Scott said two weeks ago: Any potential college football playoff needs to prioritize teams that win their conference.

Adam Rittenberg over at the Big Ten blog chatted with Ohio State AD Gene Smith, who was unequivocal about his top priority:

"The conference champion piece," Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said. "We're a collegiate environment, and we've set everything up for competition to be conference champions, and we have it in every single sport that we have. ... When you go through your conference and you win your conference championship, that's pretty strong."

Other parties at the table in this playoff debate favor a "Four best teams plan," one that would only ensure the process remain just as subjective as the present BCS standings.

The good news is there is plenty of room for compromise between the folks who are right (winning a conference championship matters) and those who are wrong (let's pretend we can rank the four best teams).

The Pac-12 blog is on record supporting the "Top-six plan": Conference champions would be required to be ranked in the top six of the final rankings in order to earn automatic berths in the four-team playoff. If four conference champions aren't ranked in the top six, then the highest ranked at-large teams would fill however many voids there are.

But there's wiggle room here:

[Nebraska athletic director Tom] Osborne told ESPN.com that there has been "a lot of discussion" this week about having the top three conference champions and the highest-ranked at-large team in the four-team playoff. This model would give access to a team like reigning national champion Alabama, which didn't win its league or its division but finished No. 2 in the final BCS standings and beat LSU for the title.

"I don't think you can say all four placements are conference champions," Smith said. "You have to leave some room for that type of scenario, that best high-ranked team that is not a conference champion has some room to get in there."

Of course, you can immediately see how this could get controversial. What happens if a fourth conference champion has the same record as a more highly rated at-large team? Further, we still don't know the rating system -- the old BCS rankings, a new ratings system, a selection committee, etc.

The good news is that the Pac-12 and Big Ten are aligned on their thinking: Any playoff format needs to give priority to teams that win their conference championship.

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.

Matt Hays of The Sporting News, presently known as Urban Meyer's BFF, has published his post-spring ranking of the top 25 players in college football. He writes: "These rankings are based on a combination of on-field performance and next level potential."

The list includes seven Pac-12 players. The SEC leads all conferences with nine (Washington fans: You might take note that practically the entire LSU defense made the cut).

Particularly interesting is the comment from an NFL scout on each player.

Here are the Pac-12 players on the list with comment.

1. Matt Barkley, QB, USC
NFL scout says: “He would have been a top-5 pick this year. He’ll probably be No.1 overall next year.”


2. Marqise Lee, WR, USC
NFL scout says: “These are the guys where you wish we had the one-and-done rule of the NBA.”


9. Robert Woods, WR, USC
NFL scout says: “He’s going to play a long time in this league. He has position smarts; he knows the game and is loaded with ability.”


14. De'Anthony Thomas, WR-RB, Oregon
NFL scout says: “He’s a fun guy to watch -- but he’s 160 pounds. How many guys in this league are 160 pounds?”


17. Shayne Skov, LB, Stanford
NFL scout says: “A classic middle linebacker. Hopefully he’s the same player after the injury. He’s one of those guys where you say, that kid’s a football player.”


19. Keith Price, QB, Washington
NFL scout says: “I don’t know if he plays quarterback at this level, but he has one big thing going for him: he has Sark [Washington coach Steve Sarkisian] coaching him. If anyone can get him ready to play at this level, Sark can.”


22. Keenan Allen, WR, California
NFL scout says: “He’s not a name the average college football fan would know, but he’ll be a name you’ll know in the NFL in no time.”

Welcome to the mailbag.

Follow me on Twitter here.

We have a note from a not-so-special guest this week to lead off.

Ted Miller from Scottsdale, Ariz., writes: Hey, Ted! You and Kevin do a great job. Is it true that the Surgeon General found that reading the Pac-12 blog makes you smarter? Doesn't surprise me a bit!

Anyway. My question: What do you think about word that some Pac-12 schools are dragging their feet on scheduling games with Big Ten foes, per the Big Ten-Pac-12 alliance?

Ted Miller: You have reached a new low, Self, with this juvenile artifice. So apologies to all. (I just wanted to address this).

Are some Pac-12 teams not thrilled with the Big Ten-Pac-12 partnership? Maybe.

It was announced in December that the Rose Bowl partners and academically elite conferences would, starting in 2017, play an annual football series involving all 12 schools in both leagues. But Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez told Big Ten blogger Brian Bennett on Thursday that the partnership in football had not been finalized because "there are a couple of teams in the Pac-12 that are dragging their feet a little bit."

Both conference offices denied there were major issues. A Pac-12 spokesman emailed this statement: "Our schools are excited about the collaboration with the Big Ten, and we are continuing to work on sports scheduling details."

But the truth is, yes, some schools aren't thrilled, which goes along with scheduling issues that the Pac-12 blog has frequently -- redundantly? -- noted through the years.

Let's say you're Stanford.

• You start with a nine-game Pac-12 schedule. The ACC, SEC and Big Ten play an eight-game conference schedule, which allows for four nonconference foes -- read: typically at least three scheduled patsies.
• Then you add Stanford's (and California's) insistence on playing USC and UCLA every year. Hey, tradition!
• Then you add Oregon's rise in the North Division as a national power.
• Then you add an annual series with Notre Dame.
• Then you add an annual game with the Big Ten.

That means Stanford could play 11 tough games every year against top AQ foes.

Here's Mark Schlabach's Way Too Early Top-25. Let's say the Cardinal next fall drew Michigan State as its Big Ten foe. That means Stanford would play: No. 2 USC, No. 4 Oregon, No. 9 Michigan State and No. 23 Notre Dame in 2012. Great fun. You could compute Cal's schedule much the same way.

The Pac-12 blog has some solutions. These solutions will be: 1. Best for the Pac-12; 2. Best for Cal and Stanford; 3. Controversial.

First, the Pac-12 needs to end the nine-game conference schedule. It might make athletic directors' lives easier in terms of scheduling and filling a stadium, but it hurts their teams and the conference as a whole. That's not an opinion. It's a mathematical fact.

Kill it. Please.

Second, Stanford and Cal need to end this silly "We must play USC and UCLA every year!" deal. Hey, I get it. Some fans enjoy the weekender. But -- come closer, because I want to whisper to you an embarrassing truth -- IT"S STUPID TO INSIST ON PLAYING USC EVERY YEAR! (Whoops... did I just yell that?) And, heck, UCLA should eventually get back into the top-25.

Insisting on playing USC every year is no different than if the ADs at Cal and Stanford said, "Hey, let's play Alabama... EVERY YEAR!"

Here is the realpolitik of college football: You can schedule success.

The Pac-12, instead, is scheduling failure. Its scheduling practices create a perception that makes the conference seem worse than it is, just as the SEC's scheduling practices accomplish the opposite.

I will not quote Cal coach Jeff Tedford and Stanford coach David Shaw on this matter. Both these guys are competitors who fear no team.

But neither one of them will hate me after reading this.

Nor will any other Pac-12 coach.

Big Ten-Pac-12 alliance? Great. Love big nonconference games. Second best thing in college football behind rivalry games.

But, first, kill the nine-game conference schedule. Then end the "designated games" between the California teams. Set up a pure rotating schedule between the North and South Divisions that will ensure the best scheduling equity possible.

---

Emtee Dubyew from Keizer, Ore., writes: I recently read an article on ESPN that Ohio State is installing a "Oregon style" no-huddle rapid paced offense. I seem to remember a segment Urban Meyer did when he worked for ESPN, he talked to Chip Kelly about Oregon's offense and practice methods. I mean with the PAC-12/Big10 relationship Oregon and Ohio State could do battle in the future. So would this lead to coaches being less willing to share their secrets and methods with the rest of us?

Ted Miller: Hmm... that name. You Ducks and Huskies never stop, do you? You mean this video, of course. Good stuff with Chip & Urban.

Less willing to do cool videos like this? I doubt it, and let's hope not.

First of all, coaches visit other teams all the time, though reasonably they don't allow visitors from teams they are scheduled to play. And more than a few times, it becomes a joke at a bowl game that one set of coaches met with the other set the previous spring. Still, the exchange of ideas doesn't yield details of a specific game plan. While Kelly and Meyer offer some nice insights during their chat, it's mostly superficial stuff that can be easily digested by a general audience.

Further, Meyer is an offensive innovator much like Kelly, with both on the front lines of spread-option concepts. That Meyer is planning to adopt an up-tempo, no-huddle offense is no surprise.

---

David from San Diego writes: So the big word post-spring practice is that USC's secondary is for real this year. Now I'm a die heard USC fan, but how can this assessment be made when everyone and their mama knows that USC's offense consisted mainly of 2 young, backup QB's, a thin RB corp, the best WR in the PAC-12 or possibly the nation out of action, not too mention all of our TE's have been hurt and not practicing either. Would you agree that all the hoopla on the secondary is a tad bit premature?

Ted Miller: All hoopla in April is a tad premature, just as the hoopla over a recruiting class is premature. We in the sportswriting business spend a lot of time giving you premature judgments, just as fans on message boards do the same -- "No worries! We have a JC transfer coming in who will solve all our problems!"

Why are folks high on USC's secondary?

Well, for one, it welcomes back all four starters from a unit that yielded the fewest TD passes (17) in the Pac-12 last season. The Trojans ranked fourth in the Pac-12 in pass efficiency defense. Not only that, just about every guy on the two-deep is back. Oh, and Florida transfer Josh Shaw is eligible to play in 2012.

Cornerback Nickell Robey and safety T.J. McDonald were both first-team All-Pac-12. McDonald is an almost certain preseason All-American. He could be the first safety picked in the 2013 NFL draft.

And there's a hunch, and it's not unreasonable, that Year 3 under coordinator Monte Kiffin could yield strong improvement, just as it did in 2011 compared to 2010.

So, best I can tell, the hoopla is based on good players coming back from a good secondary that seems likely to be better in 2012.

Or, perhaps, the hoopla comes entirely from a counter-intelligence operation run by a cabal of Freemason USC boosters connected to the Trilateral Commission.

---

Don from Portland writes: While I agree with you that pot in Oregon is seen as a non issue, it seems that the Ducks willingness to speak candidly about smoking to a reporter bespeaks a complete disregard for the feelings of their coaches, fans, and those players who do not use drugs. Shouldn't Chip Kelley be more concerned about his players apparent lack of loyalty?

Ted Miller: Yes, based on the ESPN Magazine article, it's clear at least one Duck broke the locker room Omertà. Yes, that should annoy Kelly and other players. I doubt it will keep anybody up at night, but it's a concern.

But that also answers some of you who feel Oregon was singled out or targeted. Typically how it works for a reporter working a story is he gets a tip or a lead, then he has to get a source talking. That's what happened here. And let's be real. If we were ranking Pac-12 towns for a laissez-faire attitude toward marijuana smoking, it likely would go: 1. Eugene; 2. Berkeley; 3. Boulder; 4. Seattle; 5. LA. As the article noted, "... The Princeton Review and High Times both have ranked the University of Oregon among the most pot-friendly schools."

You probably have just as many, er, "enthusiasts" here in Arizona among the Wildcats and Sun Devils. But I would suggest that the political-legal attitudes here are a bit different, not to mention rules about random testing.

Also, I do want to point out to Ducks fans, Oregon wasn't really singled out that much. For one, there was also a general story on pot smoking in college football, the gist of which is "wow... just about everybody is doing it."

Also, from the article:

NEWS FLASH: COLLEGE kids smoke weed. That includes, according to an NCAA study released in January, 22.6 percent of athletes -- up 1.4 percentage points from the previous study in 2005. College football players (26.7 percent) ranked the highest among major sports. And the Oregon football program provides an interesting case study on the impact -- or lack thereof -- of marijuana use among players.

And this: "One senior NFL executive who interviewed players at the combine says about 70 percent confessed to smoking pot, likely on the advice of their agents."

There was no implication in any part of the story that Oregon is unique. It just ended up being the "case study," in large part because someone on the team was willing to be a source.

There also was this about Kelly: "The Oregon regime is also cracking down. Anecdotal evidence suggests that Kelly has taken a hard stance in his three seasons as head coach. "I've heard weed was bigger before I got there," says one Kelly-era Duck, "but Chip cracked down on that. He'll actually attend classes with guys. If you miss a study hall, he'll drug-test you."

I got a lot of mail about this series. Most of you noted that the under-25 demographic has a much different vision about marijuana usage than the 50-and-overs. No doubt about that. Some of you were mad at ESPN, citing our desire to crush a West Coast power that threatens the SEC. Lots of folks communicated a general, "Neh." Some of you appeared to be partaking while typing.

My feeling, as I previously wrote, is this: Fret about this for 20 minutes. But that was on Wednesday, so it's time to move on. This article is unlikely to do any real harm to the university or the football program.

---

Ryan from Fairfield, Conn., writes: I am a former collegiate football player, and now I am inspiring to be a Director/ Producer. One of my best friends and myself created this mini-documentary, it is an emotional conversation with football players. Here is the Youtube link, check it out tell me what you think.

Ted Miller: I think it's pretty cool.

Ohio State is becoming... Oregon Midwest?

That's what Big Ten blogger Adam Rittenberg noted on Wednesday, getting such analysis straight from the new mouth of the Horseshoe, Urban Meyer.

"All you've got to do is look at Oregon," Meyer told Rittenberg. "We're committed to it. We're still going to pop a huddle once in a while, but we're committed to it."

That sounds like bad news for the rest of the Big Ten, but perhaps not for one of the Buckeyes nonconference foes in 2012: California.

While no defense has had consistent success stopping Oregon -- LSU even had its moments of failure in the 2011 opener -- the Bears have produced more stops against the Ducks than most, most notably the 2010 nailbiter that Oregon won just 15-13.

That's Chip Kelly's fourth-lowest point total since he's been in Eugene, including his two years as offensive coordinator (and that includes the shutout the Ducks suffered at UCLA the week after QB Dennis Dixon blew out his knee in 2007). The Ducks also scored only 16 points at Cal in 2008, but that predates coordinator Clancy Pendergast and the Bears' 3-4 look.

Last year, Cal led the Ducks 15-14 at halftime, shutting Oregon out in the second quarter. What happened after the break doesn't support our point, so we will ignore it.

Here's something Cal fans might not be entertaining but perhaps should: Cal can win in Columbus on Sept. 15.

Seriously.

Yes, the Bears tend to go rear-end-over-tea-kettle on the road, particularly when they travel east.

Yes, the Horseshoe is a brutal venue in which to play, one of the nation's toughest.

Yes, Ohio State is still Ohio State, one of the nation's elite programs.

And, yes, Meyer is a feared strategist.

But there's no escaping this: California will go to Ohio State with perhaps the biggest and most athletic front seven the Buckeyes will face in 2012. And the Bears line up against a highly questionable offensive line, one that welcomes back just two starters from a unit that yielded 46 sacks -- 118th in the nation -- on just 245 pass attempts.

For comparison: Arizona, with four new starters on its offensive line in 2011, gave up 23 sacks on 577 passes. Washington State gave up 40 on 492 passes.

The Ohio State offense in 2011 was QB Braxton Miller, who led the Buckeyes in rushing (715 yards with seven touchdowns) and passing (1,159 yards with 13 touchdowns) as a freshman. He's a major talent, but he certainly won't be the first dual-option QB the Bears defense has seen.

I know Cal fans don't want to hear any optimism from the Pac-12 blog because they well know that is typically the program's ineluctable KISS OF DEATH.

So I won't mention the plausibility of the Bears visiting USC on Sept. 22 at 3-0 and nationally ranked.

Happy Friday.

Follow me on Twitter, which is the zany new computer thing!

To the notes!

Sam from Eugene, Ore., writes: I'm a Duck and have always been a Duck but how can you not have Mike Riley on the poll for 2nd best Pac 12 coach?

Ted Miller: More than a few of you -- unhappy Oregon State fans mostly -- have called me a Mike Riley apologist, speculating that I don't criticize the Beavers' coach as much as a should because I like him.

Maybe. I do like him. Don't know anyone who doesn't, other than a former San Diego Chargers quarterback who will not be named in order to spare me a Cougars backlash.

But the reason Riley wasn't included in our poll asking who the No. 2 coach is in the Pac-12 (behind the obvious No. 1, Oregon's Chip Kelly) is that Riley has coached consecutive losing seasons -- 8-16 record, in fact. It would appear he enters the season on the hot seat.

I think Riley is a good coach. I think the Beavers have a solid shot of turning things around this fall. So he could end up on a postseason list asking who the No. 2 coach is.

But in a fluid ranking of coaches, Riley wouldn't be many folks' choice for No.2 in March of 2012.

---

Phillip from West Lafayette, Ind., writes: Why no Sark in your second best coach of the Pac-12 poll? If Leach, who hasn't coached in a couple of years and hasn't coached in a conference with defenses is on the list (which I have no problem with) why can't Sark be on the list? He inherited a disaster and has one of the best Offenses in the country. He fired a close friend, pillaged other schools defensive and recruiting minds and seems to have addressed the Defensive issues fairly well. If UW had a Top 75 D last year they are a Top 25 team. So, again, why no Sark?

Ted Miller: I think Steve Sarkisian is a talented coach who did a great job rebuilding a team that went 0-12 in 2008 to competitive almost immediately. He's upgraded the talent in Seattle with good recruiting, and he upgraded his staff this offseason, particularly with the hiring of defensive coordinator Justin Wilcox.

But he's only been a head coach three years, and he's gone 19-19. The Huskies lost five of their final seven games last season.

Mike Leach went 84-43 at Texas Tech, and was the 2008 Big 12 Coach of the Year. He's also is considered one of the great offensive innovators in college football.

---

Waiting for November from Eastern Daylight Time writes: two part question re: UO/USC:1) IF both teams are undefeated heading into the showdown in LA, what do you think a victory would mean for either team in the larger picture/narrative (BCS implications aside)? Return to elite status for USC? Confirmed elite status for Ducks?? Or neither? Seems to be the first year in many where bos and conference teams who have dominated conference in last decade will have serious talent, no sanctions, and conf. leadership on the line all at once. 2) You seem to have alluded to UO's strength of schedule and its implications for BCS standings when comparing UO/USC. Weak schedules have not hurt other teams rankings previously, as you have touched on before. Do the Ducks face a different narrative vis a vis strength of schedule TODAY because USC is the (for many) assumed favorite in the PAC-12?

Ted Miller: 1. If USC and Oregon are undefeated when they play on Nov. 3, I think the winner will end up ranked, at worst, No. 2. 2. USC returned to elite status with a final top-five ranking last season. Oregon became elite with its third consecutive Pac-10/12 title and its Rose Bowl victory.

As for Oregon's schedule: I've only questioned the nonconference slate, which is decidedly weak (and, yes, I know Kansas State finked out of a game). If the Pac-12 produces a handful of ranked teams, other than the Ducks and Trojans, the schedule toughness will take care of itself, particularly if other conference teams the Ducks are beating win big nonconference games.

Also, the Ducks and Trojans will start high enough in the national rankings that a weak schedule won't be a big deal. That wouldn't be true if they started ranked, say, 21st.

---

Mike from Palo Alto writes: Why do people continue to ignore and overlook Stanford in conversations about Pac-12 contenders (or even dark horses) next year? Sure they're losing the best QB in a generation, but they've got a hefty portion of returning starters, and the QBs competing to replace luck are a couple of 4-stars who've spent a few years learning under Luck, Harbaugh and Shaw.

Ted Miller: First, I don't think anyone is overlooking Stanford. The Cardinal is likely to be the third Pac-12 team -- after USC and Oregon -- ranked in the preseason top-25. Stanford could be a factor in the North race, though road games at Oregon, California and Washington won't help. And playing USC in Week 3, though at home, isn't ideal with a new quarterback.

But, just as I often pointed out that Stanford in 2011 wasn't just Andrew Luck, the voids in 2012 aren't just about Luck either.

Start with two offensive linemen who likely will be first round NFL draft picks. Yes, the Cardinal replaced three offensive linemen in 2011 and did fine, but the reason many thought the line would be fine last fall was the fact that the two coming back, David DeCastro and Jonathan Martin were, yes, future first-round NFL draft picks.

Then there's the losses of the top three receivers, including tight end Coby Fleener (another potential first-round pick), a pair of multi-year starters at safety, and underrated defensive end Matt Masifilo.

Does this mean Stanford won't play in a third-consecutive BCS bowl game? No. But these are big enough losses that it's reasonable to be skeptical. That's why I'd set the Cardinal's over-under with wins at eight.

And it's meaningful that doing so will ruffle some feathers -- among fans and inside the locker room. That shows how far the program has come.

---

Sean from Berkeley, Calif., writes: Looking at Oregon's schedule. Easiest 8-0 start ever? Guaranteed 10 win season? Only teams that will challenge will be @USC and @Cal? Washington or Stanford can't beat the Ducks in Eugene.

Ted Miller: If I were predicting, I would predict an 8-0 start for the Ducks.

But, man, such giddy confidence -- overconfidence? -- strikes me as a dangerous thing. Ever heard of karma?

You might need to make a sacrifice at the altar of the College Football Gods for that one.

---

Matt from Cupertino, Calif., writes: Ted, how likely is it that Cal goes into The Shoe on September 15th and pulls out a victory against Urban's Buckeyes? Curious to see how you think each team matches up, even this far away from the game.

Ted Miller: My initial feeling: Not likely.

Cal isn't typically good on the road, particularly when it goes east. Then you've got the Horseshoe and new coach Urban Meyer, two college football landmarks. Further, I think there should be a strong "buy" rating on Ohio State quarterback Braxton Miller, who did an admirable job in a bad situation as a freshman in 2011.

That said, there are a couple of things in Cal's favor, not the least of which is the Buckeyes playing with a postseason ban due to NCAA sanctions.

First, the Bears should have a big athletic advantage with their young-but-talented defense against what is a highly questionable Buckeyes offensive line, one that welcomes back just two starters from a unit that yielded 46 sacks. Second, the Buckeyes' defense should be good, but still doesn't look like one of the dominant units of the Jim Tressel era.

After a tumultuous offseason, Ohio State went 6-7 last season and lost its last four games. I'll likely pick the Buckeyes to beat the Bears -- in large part because I never pick Cal games right anyway -- but this is far from a mismatch.

---

Nate from Houston writes: First of all, I refuse to vote in your 2nd best coach poll because the USC staff is #1. Not #2, #1. Second, what do you think the odds are that Marquis Lee has a better year than Robert Woods? Lee is really blossoming with a season under him and his track participation is a giant help in conditioning, conditioning that Woods is missing out on due to his ankle....

Ted Miller: This shows how good the Trojans are at receiver. It's legit to ask if Lee might be better than Woods, who was an All-American in 2011.

I think Lee is very good. I think both will be early round NFL draft picks. But let's not forget how good Woods is when he's healthy, which he wasn't much late in the season.

If I were projecting, I'd still guess that Woods ends up with more yards and TDs than Lee. But it should be close enough that both are in the All-American conversation.

---

uc2k3 from Huskyville, Wash., writes: I came across an interesting suggestion by Dabo Swinney and one I've been thinking of and meaning to ask you for some time now. It's in regards to setting up scrimmages with other schools in the offseason. Just one scrimmage vs a nearby school. I've always thought that this would make the spring more interesting for players and fans and also give coaches a better assessment tool when trying to evaluate different position groups. Your thoughts?

Ted Miller: Well, uc2k3 -- are you buddies with R2D2? -- you won't ever hear me say (or write): "We need less college football."

So count me in. Just imagine what fun a scrimmage between state rivals might be. Heck, you could give half the gate away to charity, and we'd all feel good about ourselves.

The downside? Well, injuries for one. And what's the set-up? Do you keep score? Does that force you to care about winning? And what worries are there about giving away info -- about players, about schemes -- that could be used against you, by future regular-season opponents, as well as the team you scrimmage.

Still, if, say, Arizona and Arizona State sent me an email announcing a scrimmage, I'd show up with a big grin (and then both sets of fans would say I favor the other).

---

SEC fan from Fayetteville, Ark., writes: I know you grew up in SEC country and followed it for a while before moving off west, but why do you constantly write trash trying to make other conferences than the PAC10+2 hate on your articles? You constantly talk crap, mainly on the SEC but the BIG 10 and BIG 12-2 too? Your articles sound like everything happening back in the PAC is doing everything right while everyone else is doing everything wrong! I know your writing for a fan base that wants you to take their side and I honestly have no idea what your true point of view on college football is but how about trying to write how everyone wants a playoff in football but the PAC commish is keeping it from that? Start writing truth instead of trying to rowdy up the fan base your writing for and maybe honest people like me would take your writing seriously.

Ted Miller: Hmm.

One of the realities of my business is there is often a curiously wide distance between an accusation from a reader and what you actually have written. Or at least tried to write. When you work in the media, folks often insist, "You wrote this!" when you didn't, "You're biased!" when you work hard not to be, and "You don't know what you're talking about!" when you're actually parroting exactly what either a coach or player told you.

In this instance, let's start with this: "how about trying to write how everyone wants a playoff in football but the PAC commish is keeping it from that."

If I wrote that, it would be not only untrue, it would be the 180 degree opposite of true. The disconnect here is perhaps "SEC Fan" forgetting that Tom Hansen is no longer the Pac-10 commissioner. Larry Scott started talking about postseason models almost as soon as he was hired.

Then there's this: "why do you constantly write trash trying to make other conferences than the PAC10+2 hate on your articles? You constantly talk crap, mainly on the SEC but the BIG 10 and BIG 12-2 too? Your articles sound like everything happening back in the PAC is doing everything right while everyone else is doing everything wrong!"

Er, some examples? I get more blowback from Pac-12 fans who insist I coddle the SEC.

If this is just about my debate with SEC blogger Chris Low, well, the nature of that assignment -- "How would USC QB Matt Barkley do in the SEC?" -- was, in part, to trash talk each other.

Of course, I did write this: "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."

Just don't start taking my writing too seriously. That would make me cry.

Sniffle.

USC-Oregon, Oregon-USC. Ducks-Trojans. Kiffin-Kelly! Barkley-Black Mamba!

Golly, doesn't anybody else have a chance in this Pac-12 conference? Should we just call off the regular season and have the Ducks and Trojans settle things in a 13-game series?

(That actually might be fascinating to watch. Think about all the interesting weekly coaching adjustments).

Well, that's not happening.

So then the question before us is a radical one. It might very well split up the space-time continuum and send us spinning into a massive black hole: Which team possibly might shock the world? Which team could break up this apparently preordained marriage at the top of the conference, one reportedly written in gold leaf onto the granite facade of Mount Rushmore?

It's a dangerous question, I know. Not the sort of one entertained by the meek. But if you are brave, read on.

Hey, you in the gray shirt, you're not brave! Better stop reading.

We warned you.

Kevin Gemmell: The general consensus is that Oregon and USC will meet for the Pac-12 title. But which team could put a wrinkle in that plan?

Whenever you are dealing with a could question, you always have to stipulate with ifs. X could happen if Y and Z fall into place. The team that strikes me as having the fewest ifs is Utah.

My first thought was to go wayyyyy out there and tinker with the idea of Oregon State being the team to shock the Pac-12. The Beavers could be the surprise team if they get the running game in order, and if the offensive line holds up, and if Sean Mannion continues to mature, and if all of that experience from last season pays off. But that's just too many ifs, and way too far to reach.

Utah, however, has a lot of pieces in place already to be the surprise team this season. First, its schedule helps, because the Utes don't have dates with Oregon or Stanford. Their first three games are in-state, and the fourth is at ASU, which will likely still be adjusting to life under a new head coach. That's potentially 4-0 out of the gate.

Then they get an extra week to prepare for the big showdown -- at home -- with USC. That game will be high-noon in the Pac-12 South, and Rice-Eccles will be jumping. If the Utes can somehow get over that hump, they have four more winnable games before traveling to Washington, which could be a hiccup. That notion alone, however, is one major if. USC also has extra time to prepare, because it's a Thursday game.

Another reason to be encouraged is that all reports are that quarterback Jordan Wynn is healthy. He's chock full of experience, and has shown he can be an elite quarterback when he gets his rhythm. The only reason to think the running game will take a step backwards is that Utah has to replace two stud offensive tackles in Tony Bergstrom and John Cullen. But John White IV has shown to be a very capable -- if not special -- running back. He shouldn't have any trouble adapting.

Also, unlike a lot of other teams with new coordinators, the transition to Brian Johnson should be silky, since he's a veteran of the system and has worked with Wynn since Day 1.

The Utes have one of the top -- if not the best -- defense in the conference. With plenty of returning starters and the most feared defensive lineman in the Pac-12, they should be able to win a game or two on defense alone.

Given the way their schedule is laid out -- combined with returning talent on both sides of the ball and an outstanding coaching staff -- it's not outside the realm of possibility that the Utes could emerge from the South.

Ted Miller: One word: Plastics.

No, wait. That's something else. Our word is "schedule."

Now we have four words: California Freaking Golden Bears! You're back. Welcome. You remember where everything is, right, up here in the national rankings? No, coach Tedford, you don't have to sleep on that twin mattress in your office. You have the view suite down the hall. Yes, it has been a while. Yes, breakfast is included. Eggs Benedict? Well, your wife did tell us about your cholesterol. You want us to stick it? Well, then, Eggs Benedict it is!

The Bears have the schedule to upset the Trojans-Ducks destination wedding. And the talent, by the way.

Schedule? Cal plays host to Oregon, Stanford and Washington, the likely three top teams in the North Division. Plays host, by the way, at an awesomely cool renovated Memorial Stadium that will put the Strawberry back in the Canyon. The Bears went 30-9 in Memorial Stadium between 2005-2010 before playing their home games in AT&T Park in 2011, including 7-0 marks in 2006 and 2008.

Every team is better at home. Cal fans would tell you their team is better-er at home. Sure, it's had its share of mega face-plants in front of the home fans -- Oregon State in 2007 (altogether now "ouch"), USC in 2009, and that three-game home losing streak to end 2010 with a whimper. But there is no doubt it will be better to play the Ducks, Huskies and Cardinal at home, particularly with the Ducks and Cardinal breaking in new quarteracks.

And Cal isn't breaking in a new quarterback. What if, just maybe, Zach Maynard plays the entire season like he did the final four games of the 2011 regular season? And what if offensive coordinator Jim Michalczik works his magic with the line his second year back in Berkeley? And what if all that young talent -- Mustafa Jalil, Stefan McClure, Todd Barr, Viliami Moala, Brennan Scarlett, David Wilkerson, Chris McCain, Michael Coley, Avery Sebastian, Cecil Whiteside, etc. -- breaks through on defense?

We'll probably get a pretty good measure of the Bears early on. They will take a 2-0 record to Ohio State on Sept. 15. That is a winnable game, but it will require the Bears to go East and show some fire. You might recall that they didn't exactly do that in recent years at Tennessee and Maryland.

Then they visit USC. Jeff Tedford is 1-9 against USC, losing those nine by a combined count of 291-144. The Bears can afford to lose at USC, though a poor showing might cause the team to question itself and make it seem like these are the "same ole Bears." That, however, is not a divisional game. The larger issue is holding serve at home, which would give Cal an advantage in the event of a tie atop the North.

As Kevin noted above, we have a surfeit of "ifs" for both scenarios. It just feels as though Oregon and USC are that far ahead of everyone else.

But you do know that you never know until you do know.

We've given you our thoughts recently on which Pac-12 player has the best shot at winning the Heisman. You've given your thoughts (an extremely tight poll) and now the folks at HeismanPundit.com have offered up their darkhorse candidates for 2012.

They looked at 12 not-as-mainstream candidates who could contend for the Heisman Trophy, and four of them are from the Pac-12.

First, the list:

• Eddie Lacy, Alabama
• Curtis McNeal, USC
• Fitzgerald Toussaint, Michigan
• Kenjon Barner, Oregon
• James Franklin, Missouri
• Braxton Miller, Ohio State
• Kiehl Frazier, Auburn
• Le'Veon Bell, Michigan State
• Cierre Wood, Notre Dame
• Christine Michael, Texas A&M
• Jesse Callier, Washington
• De'Anthony Thomas, Oregon

Their thoughts on each of the Pac-12 players:

On McNeal: A total of 150 carries have departed the program and there is little depth behind the senior, who will benefit from defenses focusing on USC’s strong passing attack. Give McNeal at least half of those departed carries and you are looking at a possible 1,500 yard season, if not more.

On Barner: There were times the rest of the year when he looked as good as, if not better than, James. This year, the Ducks lose not only James’ 247 carries, but also the 45 of freshman Tra Carson and the 56 of quarterback Darron Thomas, for a total of 347 carries to be redistributed.

On Callier: I actually think there is a good chance that Washington experiences no dropoff at this position and that Callier establishes himself as one of the top backs in the Pac-12 with a season exceeding 1,300 yards on the ground.

On Thomas: Thomas is obviously an interesting case since he is such an all-around dynamo. Last year, he had just 140 touches, with 39 of them coming in the return game. This was a wise move by Oregon, as keeping the rather slight Thomas fresh and healthy is the key to his effectiveness. It worked, as he had 18 touchdowns and 2,235 total yards. In that vein, Oregon might be tempted to put a huge workload on him in 2012, but I don’t foresee it unless there is a desperate need.

Fun list. With frontrunner Matt Barkley out there, along with Washington quarterback Keith Price, a couple of USC wide receivers and A-list running backs like John White IV and Stepfan Taylor, there is certainly no wanting for offensive talent in the conference. Per usual.

Which players emerge will definitely be one of the more fascinating stories to follow in 2012.

It takes two to make a thing go right. It takes two to make it outta sight.

• Arizona will have a scrimmage at Glendale Community College, so its Phoenix-area fans can check out the Wildcats. Practices are loud and fast.
• Chatting with the Arizona State quarterback candidates.
• Some offensive notes from California's spring practice. Taking a look at the Bears' next generation of running backs.
• Mi Kasa es su Kasa? Colorado coach Jon Embree just hopes he's got a tight end.
• Some fast Ducks are strutting their stuff for Oregon's track team.
• Brandon Hardin and James Rodgers were the stars of Oregon State's pro day.
• Stanford offensive coordinator Pep Hamilton is "on the mic."
• The key for USC this season might be finding a reasonably productive noseguard.
• Former Utah coach Urban Meyer talks about missing Utah and the Utes.
• Some Pac-12 talk at Solid Verbal.

California's Jeff Tedford and Oregon State's Mike Riley will enter 2012 spring practices facing those delightful "hotseat" questions. It's a drag for them to endure such queries, and reporters get no joy from making the coaches they cover grumpy by probing their feelings on their job security.

But most coaches will tell you that it doesn't take much to warm up the ole coaching throne. After all, it wasn't too long ago that Tedford and Riley were the toasts of Berkeley and Corvallis.

So which other Pac-12 coaches face challenging seasons?

In this Take 2, we find things to worry about at the top of the conference as well as on the bottom.

Kevin Gemmell: Sometimes the burden of expectation is the heaviest of all. And to offer a contrarian perspective, I think Lane Kiffin might have the toughest coaching job in the Pac-12. He was trashed at Oakland. Trashed at Tennessee. Now he has a team that will likely be ranked No. 1 or No. 2 in the preseason. There isn't a lot of room to move up. But, oh, how one tiny slip-up could make for a frustrating season. For USC, the goal has to be national title game or bust. Nothing else will do.

Can you imagine if they lose at home to Oregon on Nov. 3? Or worse yet -- to Stanford in the third game of the season? Let's face it, David Shaw knows how to attack the Tampa-2. You don't spend as much time as he did in Baltimore without learning the ins and outs of that scheme. And don't think Oregon isn't looking to avenge the loss at Autzen. Or worse yet -- losing to a team that ISN'T Oregon or Stanford!?

If Kiffin gets his team to the national championship game, it will be met with the requisite "ho hum, that's what he's supposed to do with this group." If he doesn't, he'll be blasted for derailing a freight train with the top quarterback and the top wide-receiver duo in the country.

The other top two teams in the conference -- Oregon and Stanford -- both have quarterback issues. If they drop a game or two, the backlash will likely be minimal because transition usually comes at a cost. Four other teams in the conference have new head coaches -- so expectations are minimal and inconsistency is par for the course.

But not the Trojans -- who have a starting roster dripping with NFL talent. And let's look ahead to 2013. Should the Trojans fail to reach the title game this year, there will certainly be questions about why Kiffin couldn't get it done with Matt Barkley and Robert Woods. So what's to make us believe he could get it done without them? Plus, there are continuing sanctions that handcuff the program even further.

Make no mistake about it, this will be Kiffin's toughest year of coaching. This is an all-or-nothing outing. His team is the best show in a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately town. For Kiffin, there is only one thing that can go right, but a whole lot that can go wrong.

Ted Miller: I agree that Kiffin has a tough task this year with stratospheric expectations, but I suspect my guy -- Colorado coach Jon Embree -- would be willing to take on the pressure of high expectations in exchange for some of that Trojan talent.

What Embree has instead: He's a second-year coach coming off a 3-10 season at a place that is frustrated with losing. Not surprisingly, Colorado fans expect improvement. That's what new hires are supposed to do right? Set a positive trajectory. And what I keep getting from Buffaloes' fans this offseason is questions about bowl games.

Answer: Don't hold your breath.

First, look at the depth chart. Embree must replace his quarterback, top rusher, top two receivers (statistically; junior Paul Richardson is the Buffaloes best offensive player) and his best pass-rusher. While recruiting has been solid, asking freshmen and redshirt freshmen to fill obvious voids probably isn't going to get very far in the Pac-12. What has become clear is Embree inherited a substantial rebuilding project, one that would tax even Nick Saban. Bowl game? It will be surprising if the Buffs don't finish in the South Division cellar again.

And there's another problem. The Buffs probably are going to start 3-0. Hopes are going to soar and fans are going to write the Pac-12 blog, telling me to stick it in my ear. Or perhaps somewhere else. But after beating Colorado State, Sacramento State and winning at Fresno State -- not a sure thing, by the way -- the schedule toughens up. Want to know when the season likely will be made or broken? A winable three-game stretch to start the Pac-12 schedule: at Washington State, UCLA, bye, Arizona State.

To earn a bowl berth, the Buffs probably need to win two of those three games.

After that, oh boy: At USC, at Oregon, Stanford, at Arizona, Washington and Utah. Projecting one win over that stretch is optimistic, even though Colorado beat both Arizona and Utah in 2011. So in other words: A fast start charges up Buff fans, but then a weak finish crushes their optimism -- and causes them to declare Embree's honeymoon over.

As predictions go -- fast start, slow finish -- I'd rate this one as having a high probability of happening. Seemingly random quirks of scheduling can be painful. Just ask former Arizona coach Mike Stoops, whose 10-game losing streak against FBS foes, which got him fired, is more understandable when you note the Wildcats played Oklahoma State, Oregon, Stanford and USC twice each during that span. And, of course, Embree knows all about painfully quirky schedules, having played a 13-game one in 2011 that included no byes, road trips to Hawaii and Ohio State, both Oregon and Stanford from the Pac-12 North -- Utah missed both -- as well as a game with California that didn't count in the conference standings.

For what it's worth, Colorado was probably the best 3-10 team in the nation last year. And the 2011 team, on paper, looks superior to what Embree has for 2012.

Not that Embree can open his pre-spring press conference saying so. He's walking a fine line here. He deserves patience, but can't ask for it. He wants to challenge his team and build its confidence, but trumping up expectations could backfire.

The 2012 season looks like a transitional one in Boulder. In our win-now college football culture, transitional seasons can make life difficult for coaches, particularly those trying to rebuild a program and invigorate a beleaguered fanbase.