- Thread starter
- #1
The Pac-12 needs to take a page out of the ACC's playbook
Thanks for trying to kill this thread.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.
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.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.
He will be dealt with this November 10th.
Washington vs Auburn at the Mercedes - Benz Center in Atlanta should be a good one for sure.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.
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.
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.
to outofyourmind's point though, no one was running with USC consistently. when Pete came in the conference races went like thisYeah, 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.
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.