The 6-3 record sounds good. But how good is it, really? Especially with both division champs losing their bowl games.
Is this about how you thought the league would do? Or did it do better or worse? The three losses were doozies. Two of them involved blowing double-digit leads, another was a beat down. But the wins were substantial; at least the margin of victory was. The Pac-12 went 2-1 against the Mountain West, 1-0 against an independent, 1-1 against the Big 12, 2-0 against the ACC and 0-1 against the Big Ten. That’s 3-2 against teams from other major BCS conferences. Though one of those two losses was a BCS bowl game.
Time to weigh in. How would you grade the Pac-12’s postseason?
A: Considering how the league has done in previous years, six wins is outstanding. You’re bound to lose a few bowl games along the way, but the fact that nine teams were in bowls and six of them won is as good as we could have realistically hoped for.
B: Pretty good. The six wins were nice, but the two losses to teams from AQ conferences, and losing the BCS bowl game puts a mild stain on an otherwise pretty solid performance.
C: Considering the expectations, the league’s performance was average at best. Losing to a Mountain West team is frustrating and losing the BCS bowl game is frustrating. With the firepower the league had, there should have been more than six wins out there in those nine games.
D: Very disappointing. There is always one team that loses a game it shouldn’t in the postseason, but to only come away with six wins is a black mark on the league. For what the expectations were compared to how the league finished, this is disappointing.
F: Yucky! With only one BCS team, the Pac-12 could ill-afford to lose that game, let alone let a Colorado State team come back and win while watching ASU get run up and down by Texas Tech. It was an embarrassing end of the year -- especially to see both of the division champions go down in the postseason.