One thing that Pac10 fans don't seem to understand about all this BCS nonsense is that somehow playing in a conference that determines its champion ON THE FIELD by having all members play each other gets dismissed. In fact, history and previous standards of determining poll spots are often disregarded when it comes to them. The whole college football world tells them to 'get a title game or get left behind.' Nevermind the fact that joining the BCS itself was suppose to prevent the Pac10 from 'getting left behind.'... it now appears that once again the league must change itself to meet with the times, because right or wrong, they are behind left behind again.. This article makes a very, very good case for the creation of the Pac12 and the pac12 title game. Want a BCS title? try Pac12
Corey, If USC had lost by a slimmer margin to Oregon St instead of the smash mouth way that they were beat and also if the PAC 10 had a better rated conference membership in positions 3 thru 10 the Trojans would have had a better shot. Even if UCLA was one of the top BCS teams they would have had a better shot. Instead the Bruins rating hurt the Trojans significantly rather than helped. I know it's tough but that is my take on it. As much as I have not given much credit to the Big Ten I think Penn St will be more trouble for USC than one might think.
Corey, I think what has hurt worse is the perception that the Pac 10 is not a strong conference. I do think that USC has been on the outside looking in much more than they should have been. They are the strongest program by far in college football right now and what all this says to me is that we need a playoff. 4 - 8 teams would be fine. But in self interest 2 more teams and a playoff would not hurt.
If I'm Utah or BYU I'm not sure why I would want to go from the top of the Mtn West to the middle of the pack in the PAC10. As far as USC goes, they have incredible talent on that roster, but for what ever the reason they seem to play a lot more close games than they should given the talent advantage that they have. I don't know why they didn't put up 50 or 60 points on ND and UCLA. Seems like they played some other games where they should have scored more. Maybe they have so much offensive talent that they get caught up in trying to get everybody a carry or a catch. But given the # of NC's that USC has, it's hard to say that they don't get any respect.
Oregon State ran out to a 21-0 lead at halftime and held on to win 27-21. Not taking anything away from Oregon State, but the game was anything but a mauling. That was also a game in which USC lost it's interior DL and starting MLBs to inury during the 2nd half come back. USC had regained momentum in the game, but Oregon State was finally able to find their feet and kill clock once Rey Rey Inc went down. That was the 3rd game in a 4 game stretch (on the road) in which USC played on the road against Virginia, at home against Ohio State, at Oregon State and then home against Oregon. They absolutely mauled 3 of those 4 teams and ran out of time against the other. But again, excuses are made to rationalize home losses while somehow 'style points' are used to damn other teams for road losses. I agree this is a down year/rebuilding year in the Pac10. I'd also argue that the SEC is nowhere NEAR the best conference in the land. But back to the Pac10, I'd put Oregon on the field against most anyone in the country. Ditto that for Cal. Oregon is doing all of this with their 4th string QB. Ask yourself, how good is the team you follow? Would you be in the hunt for a league title and a BCS birth if your team was down to its 4th string QB? Oregon was. Oregon lost 3 games this year.. USC, Boise State and Cal. And then there's Cal. Cal is another team I'd put on the field against anyone. They had one catastrophic early morning first half against Maryland, and it didn't matter that they scored at will in the 2nd half..or that the game came down to an onside kick in which Maryland's kid did the same thing ND's Robbie Paris did (but one is a 'heads up play while the other a penalty)... Cal was disregarded from being considered good from that moment on. Ditto that for Oregon State, a VERY young team, who started slow but ended well. If you guys read the article, I share the same frustrations that the author does. We have crap bowl ties (and yes, as fans we blame the conference commissioner) We are stuck playing games against conferences you guys often just disregard anyway... of course, you don't see a lot of other folks lining up to play them either.. This isn't about supremacy, it is about showing that they are at least as good if not better than some of these other 'power' conferences on an annual basis. Dave often refers to the crap he endures from Michigan fans regarding Florida and the SEC. You wanna know what it is like living in the South as a ND//UCLA/pac10 fans?? It is brutal. According to them, we're all just girls schools playing flag football.. and no matter how many times you beat them on the field... nothing ever seems to change that impression. The CBS hacks work the radio circuit here in the South and they just trash Pac10 football.. Ditto that for Finebaum and other notable southern media icons. But the fact does remain that if you put USC on the field with any of these teams.. exactly who would be favored to beat them by Vegas? Yet they were dismissed the same week Florida was going down to Ole Miss... ugh.. (and props to the Gators for doing what they had to do to get back and play for the title, my frustration is not with them, but rather the system itself).
I hear ya Corey on the regional bias although Michigan fans I'll bet will possibly enjoy seeing Florida do well since they beat us in the Cap One last year and that is the last positive thing that happened to their program at this point....still gives them hope you know. In any event I agree the bowl tie ins for the PAC 10 aren't all that great but let's see how they do with them. They should do pretty well I would think if they are not all that bad as a conference.
MCG, But therein lies the problem. 2 I believe are against the Mountain west which has done well against the Pac10 this year. And looking at the matchups, you will have 2 of the best MWC teams playing lower qualifying pac10 teams. Those are bad matchups for us. As this season has shown, the MWC is no joke. Their better teams have done well against us.. Even bottom dwellers like Wyoming went into Tennessee and beat the Vols.. It'll be a tough road but we'll see how it shakes out.
Corey, If Oregon State had beat Oregon they would have been the PAC10 conference champion even though they had 3 losses. USC would have finished 2nd. Now if they had a playoff (assuming OSU and USC were in different divisions) they would have had to play again for the conference title and USC would be in the hunt and the conference champ. The PAC 10 came within a game of having an obviously inferior team (as you pointed out) being the conference champ. :cry:
But the games were played, on the field, and Oregon State finished 3rd in the Pac10...not 1st. Oregon beat Oregon State 64-38, so that is a mighty slim 'if'.. That's the great thing about having everyone play each other. We find out a true pecking order. Who is the 3rd best team in the SEC, Ole Miss?
Corey, we all know that when starters go down it usually hurts the team. But I maintain, and this is where I got in trouble with JO'Co last year, that USC has a team full of 4* and 5* players, 2 or 3 deep at every position. They are better able to withstand loss of a starter than just about anybody in the country. Oregon State has no such situation, I'm sure they have some 4* players, not a lot of them but some. I doubt very seriously that they have any 5* players. So against a team that is likely inferior at every position, but no doubt playing above their heads and well coached, I have a problem with putting a lot of emphasis on a couple of injuries to USC starters. They still had on the field superior talent at every position. USC just really didn't come to play in that game, inexplainable for sure, but it's a little bit of a problem recently for Pete. Give him a big game against a foe who at least likely has somewhat equal talent and he gets USC to play to their potential (Ohio State). It's against teams he should beat like a red headed stepchild that he somehows spits the bit....Stanford, UCLA, Oregon State...
Texas is in one of those conferences and in the end, it didn't come down to what they did on the field, it came down to the pollsters. As far as I was concerned, Texas was a more dangerous opponent than OK. If I'd been a SEC coach and my vote was not public, I'd have voted for OK so my conference champion would have an easier time. But then, that's just me.
gipper, we could look back a week, but I think it was the computers that put Oklahoma ahead of Texas after last week. Which in my case ticks me off even more. I have zero love for the computers and they were horrible to USC. I happen to agree with you in principal.
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the gippers new found love for the Longhorns. He used to make fun of them and Mack Brown. He must be planing another trip to Texas and wants strokes or something!!
Hey Terry, I once spent a great deal of time defending Mich. claim to an undisputed NC. And as you know I really don't like the Skunk-heads. But the fact is, if you don't protest injustice to your enemy, why should anyone listen to you when you protest injustice to yourself? Not that Texas is my enemy. I think that Texas got screwed by the schedule. First they had to play 4 straight games against ranked opponents ending with a road game against the No. 2 team. Then they had to sit there and watch OK get to rip TT at their home at the end of the season. Watching OK last night reminded me of that pathetic display by Ga. last year vs Hawaii. Beating the crap out of an inferior opponent doesn't make you better than a team that beat you by 10 pts. on a neutral field. Sometimes you wonder why the **** they play the games if the pollsters can negate the results.
Makes sense. If more people believed this, the Skybo.........er....the world would be a better place. :lol: I guess it boils down to how many different ways you can think of......subjectively, of course...... to define "injustice." :wink:
Amen! I get accused of being a closet USC fan and have for years. I try my best to deflect it back to the conference because it kills me to take the side of the Trojans. We were b*tching about injustices to ND back when we mattered and folks challenged us then about whether or not we'd care if it was someone else. I'm tired of this purgatory. Chuckles needs to get his sh*t together ASAP so we can go back to beating folks and listening to them whine about us being unworthy.. It is tiring trying to fight for what is right, especially when so many others are only concerned with the how the system favors them and only cry about it when they are on the short side of things....
Just got back in town <r>Corey,<br/> I don't know who is the 3 best team in the SEC and whether it is Ole Miss, UGA, LSU who cares. Who is the 3rd best team in the PAC 10 or the Big 10 for that matter? Do you mean who finished with the 3rd best record? The SEC decides its champion on the field too. Florida beat Alabama. Forida is the champion. <E>:?:</E></r>
Gipper, gipper, gipper...gipparoni...the gipmeister...the gipsteramus... I just know your not refering to the '97 version of Mich that would have got torched if they played....The Train....you know the rest...let me know what you think though! :lol: