Can USC & Washington carry the PAC-12 upon their shoulders?

[AlaskaGuy]

The Pac-12 needs to take a page out of the ACC's playbook

Rise of Washington, USC to elite level propels the Pac-12

 

[trojanfan12]

The Pac-12 needs to take a page out of the ACC's playbook

The author of this article is an idiot. What's the commissioner supposed to do? Tell the other 10 teams that they need to suck for the good of the conference?

Besides, if the rest of the conference did suck, then we'd be hearing how Washington and USC are just dominating a weak conference. Just like when they spewed that same bullshit during the Carroll era.

Last I checked, sports was about competition and giving your best effort to win. I like that all of the teams in the conference are constantly trying to get better and take down whoever's on top.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

The author of this article is an idiot. What's the commissioner supposed to do? Tell the other 10 teams that they need to suck?

Besides, if the rest of the conference did suck, then we'd be hearing how Washington and USC are just dominating a weak conference. Just like when they spewed that same bullshit during the Carroll era.

Thanks for trying to kill this thread.

 

[trojanfan12]

Thanks for trying to kill this thread.

 

[Innermind]

 

[AlaskaGuy]

The author of this article is an idiot. What's the commissioner supposed to do? Tell the other 10 teams that they need to suck for the good of the conference?

Besides, if the rest of the conference did suck, then we'd be hearing how Washington and USC are just dominating a weak conference. Just like when they spewed that same bullshit during the Carroll era.

Last I checked, sports was about competition and giving your best effort to win. I like that all of the teams in the conference are constantly trying to get better and take down whoever's on top.

btw I agree with your post. I hate it when some dickhead writer and/or announcer says its good for college football when Team X is playing great.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

He will be dealt with this November 10th.

 

[batchaps4me]

The Pac-12 needs to take a page out of the ACC's playbook

Adam Rittenberg wrote in his opening paragraph, "The SEC pins its hopes on Alabama, the Big Ten on Ohio State, and the Big 12 on Oklahoma." What a load of horseshit. Auburn has appeared in two BCSCG games in the last seven seasons and won one of them. Pin my hopes on Bama my ass!! Here is to a new season, may it be injury free!!

 

[batchaps4me]

To answer the question in the thread title ... yes, easily.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

The Pac-12 needs to take a page out of the ACC's playbook

Adam Rittenberg wrote in his opening paragraph, "The SEC pins its hopes on Alabama, the Big Ten on Ohio State, and the Big 12 on Oklahoma." What a load of horseshit. Auburn has appeared in two BCSCG games in the last seven seasons and won one of them. Pin my hopes on Bama my ass!! Here is to a new season, may it be injury free!!

Washington vs Auburn at the Mercedes - Benz Center in Atlanta should be a good one for sure.

 

[batchaps4me]

Washington vs Auburn at the Mercedes - Benz Center in Atlanta should be a good one for sure.

I am soooo excited for this one. I hope it is a rematch of the NC game. I am willing to concede this game if we win the first meeting!!!!

 

[outofyourmind]

Conferences need two powers that compete at a national level to gain legitimacy.
Oklahoma had that with Nebraska in the Big 8.
Oklahoma had that with Texas in the Big 12.
Now Oklahoma doesn't have much and the conference reputation suffers accordingly.

Ohio State needs a consistent power team, but it seems to be rotating up there.
Alabama used to have some kind of competition until the rest of the teams fell off the map, and the SEC credentials are slowly falling because of it.

The ACC finally has FSU back and Clemson has found themselves, all contribute to the ACC being seen as a good conference.

USC and Washington will take up that roll it looks like if both teams can sustain their momentum.
USC has an amazing number of National Championships. But the amazing part is why they don't have more due to their overwhelming dominance of that conference without any real competition for generations. Like Texas in the old Southwest Conference. WTF was holding them back???

Bottom line is that every conference needs to have the same 2 teams punching it out every year on a national level to get any reckognition.

 

[Rolltide94]

Conferences need two powers that compete at a national level to gain legitimacy.
Oklahoma had that with Nebraska in the Big 8.
Oklahoma had that with Texas in the Big 12.
Now Oklahoma doesn't have much and the conference reputation suffers accordingly.

Ohio State needs a consistent power team, but it seems to be rotating up there.
Alabama used to have some kind of competition until the rest of the teams fell off the map, and the SEC credentials are slowly falling because of it.

The ACC finally has FSU back and Clemson has found themselves, all contribute to the ACC being seen as a good conference.

USC and Washington will take up that roll it looks like if both teams can sustain their momentum.
USC has an amazing number of National Championships. But the amazing part is why they don't have more due-to their overwhelming dominance of that conference without any real competition for generations. Like Texas in the old Southwest Conference. WTF was holding them back???

Bottom line is that every conference needs to have the same 2 teams punching it out every year on a national level to get any reckognition.

I agree with everything but the last sentence. I don't think it needs to be the same two teams every year. The SEC has suffered when it was just Alabama...but not when it was Alabama-LSU or Alabama-Auburn, Alabama-Florida or even Florida-Tennessee, or any combination thereof.

Sadly, with as few inter-conference games as we play, you are probably better off if your conference is top heavy...it just can't be top heavy with 1 team. For instance, it's not the 5 OOC wins (including Virginia Tech & Nebraska) that made Tennessee look average last year, it's the 4 conference losses. Same with Georgia and LSU. You take the conference losses out of the picture and the state of affairs in the SEC last year looks slightly less toxic.

 

[batchaps4me]

I agree with everything but the last sentence. I don't think it needs to be the same two teams every year. The SEC has suffered when it was just Alabama...but not when it was Alabama-LSU or Alabama-Auburn, Alabama-Florida or even Florida-Tennessee, or any combination thereof.

Sadly, with as few inter-conference games as we play, you are probably better off if your conference is top heavy...it just can't be top heavy with 1 team. For instance, it's not the 5 OOC wins (including Virginia Tech & Nebraska) that made Tennessee look average last year, it's the 4 conference losses. Same with Georgia and LSU. You take the conference losses out of the picture and the state of affairs in the SEC last year looks slightly less toxic.

Ninja'd

 

[trojanfan12]

btw I agree with your post. I hate it when some dickhead writer and/or announcer says its good for college football when Team X is playing great.

Yeah, I mean there are certain teams/schools that when they are good, it's good for college football. But it's like some of these writers think that means that other teams are supposed to just accept their fate and not try to beat those teams.

I find it interesting that, for example, during USC's run under Pete Carroll, the only teams that seemed to be able to beat us were PAC teams...yet we were supposedly dominating a weak conference.

 

[trojanfan12]

Great quote from RichRod at yesterdays media day that sums up the PAC, imo: "USC may have to make some mistakes for someone to beat them, but we aren't forfeiting."

Happens to be about USC this time, but it's the attitude all of the teams take, regardless of who's favored to win the conference.

 

[Olyduck]

Yeah, I mean there are certain teams/schools that when they are good, it's good for college football. But it's like some of these writers think that means that other teams are supposed to just accept their fate and not try to beat those teams.

I find it interesting that, for example, during USC's run under Pete Carroll, the only teams that seemed to be able to beat us were PAC teams...yet we were supposedly dominating a weak conference.

to outofyourmind's point though, no one was running with USC consistently. when Pete came in the conference races went like this
2002 USC Tied for 1st with WSU AZst distant 3rd
2003 USC 1st WSU 2nd Oregon 3rd
2004 USC 1st Cal 2nd AZ st 3rd
2005 USC 1st Oregon 2nd UCLA 3rd
2006 USC tied for 1st with Cal Oregon state 3rd
2007 USC tied for 1st with AZ st Oregon state 3rd
2008 USC 1st Oregon 2nd Oregon st 3rd

in all of that USC never won the conference by more than 1 game. they either lost or had close wins every year except 2005 that year they pretty much dominated.

 

[Olyduck]

The Pac-12 needs to take a page out of the ACC's playbook

Rise of Washington, USC to elite level propels the Pac-12

no and the they don't need to and wont. The Pac has been the most cyclical conference in the country so enjoy the success while you have it because in a few years someone else will be where your team is now.

 

[tducey]

I think they can. I also expect both to be contenders for the 4 playoff spots.

 

[mcnabb7542]

The author of this article is an idiot. What's the commissioner supposed to do? Tell the other 10 teams that they need to suck for the good of the conference?

Besides, if the rest of the conference did suck, then we'd be hearing how Washington and USC are just dominating a weak conference. Just like when they spewed that same bullshit during the Carroll era.

Last I checked, sports was about competition and giving your best effort to win. I like that all of the teams in the conference are constantly trying to get better and take down whoever's on top.

Well to be fair the author is an SC alum.....