My 2016 Pac-12 Predictions

[VFL1995]

Pac-12 North:
1. Washington Huskies 11-1(8-1)
2. Stanford Cardinal 10-2(7-2)
2. Oregon Ducks 10-2(7-2)
4. Washington State Cougars 7-5(4-5)
5. Oregon State Beavers 2-10(1-8)
6. California Golden Bears 2-10(0-9)

Pac-12 South:
1. USC Trojans 9-3(7-2)
1. UCLA Bruins 9-3(7-2)
3. Arizona Wildcats 7-5(5-4)
4. Utah Utes 6-6(3-6)
4. Colorado Buffaloes 5-7(3-6)
6. Arizona State Sun Devils 4-8(2-7)

Pac-12 Championship:
Washington over USC

 

[nathans8823]

Pac-12 North:
1. Washington Huskies 11-1(8-1)
2. Stanford Cardinal 10-2(7-2)
2. Oregon Ducks 10-2(7-2)
4. Washington State Cougars 7-5(4-5)
5. Oregon State Beavers 2-10(1-8)
6. California Golden Bears 2-10(0-9)

Pac-12 South:
1. USC Trojans 9-3(7-2)
1. UCLA Bruins 9-3(7-2)
3. Arizona Wildcats 7-5(5-4)
4. Utah Utes 6-6(3-6)
4. Colorado Buffaloes 5-7(3-6)
6. Arizona State Sun Devils 4-8(2-7)

Pac-12 Championship:
Washington over USC

Interesting Washington to win it... I never would have picked that I am looking at Stanford to win it

 

[WizardHawk]

Damn, lots of love for a team that hasn't had more than 9 wins in 15 years coming off a fierce 7-6 campaign.

 

[Olyduck]

Damn, lots of love for a team that hasn't had more than 9 wins in 15 years coming off a fierce 7-6 campaign.

that less than .500 in conference last year has everyone all excited.

 

[trojanfight]

wasn't feeling much on washington but not much early season challenges. 4 straight games they should easily win. maybe arizona puts up more of a fight than I'm thinking. pretty weak non conference schedule

 

[963BUSC]

Pac-12 North:
1. Washington Huskies 11-1(8-1)
2. Stanford Cardinal 10-2(7-2)
2. Oregon Ducks 10-2(7-2)
4. Washington State Cougars 7-5(4-5)
5. Oregon State Beavers 2-10(1-8)
6. California Golden Bears 2-10(0-9)

Pac-12 South:
1. USC Trojans 9-3(7-2)
1. UCLA Bruins 9-3(7-2)
3. Arizona Wildcats 7-5(5-4)
4. Utah Utes 6-6(3-6)
4. Colorado Buffaloes 5-7(3-6)
6. Arizona State Sun Devils 4-8(2-7)

Pac-12 Championship:
Washington over USC

9-3 (7-2) would give USC a win over Alabama or Notre Dame, most likely in your view would probably be ND.
And most likely a clean slate vs the South leaving one more win vs Stanford or Oregon (given UW's record). Most likely includes a win vs UCLA

Alas by my current standards that would be a Pretty good season and right now I'd be happy. Let's be honest pretty much any season with a win over UCLA and ND and I'm fairly happy.

 

[Boise4Life]

9-3 (7-2) would give USC a win over Alabama or Notre Dame, most likely in your view would probably be ND.
And most likely a clean slate vs the South leaving one more win vs Stanford or Oregon (given UW's record). Most likely includes a win vs UCLA

Alas by my current standards that would be a Pretty good season and right now I'd be happy. Let's be honest pretty much any season with a win over UCLA and ND and I'm fairly happy.

It would include a win over UCLA because he has them in a tiebreaker for the CCG.

 

[Boise4Life]

Pac-12 North:
1. Washington Huskies 11-1(8-1)
2. Stanford Cardinal 10-2(7-2)
2. Oregon Ducks 10-2(7-2)
4. Washington State Cougars 7-5(4-5)
5. Oregon State Beavers 2-10(1-8)
6. California Golden Bears 2-10(0-9)

Pac-12 South:
1. USC Trojans 9-3(7-2)
1. UCLA Bruins 9-3(7-2)
3. Arizona Wildcats 7-5(5-4)
4. Utah Utes 6-6(3-6)
4. Colorado Buffaloes 5-7(3-6)
6. Arizona State Sun Devils 4-8(2-7)

Pac-12 Championship:
Washington over USC

If that happens, Washington would almost certainly be getting a playoff spot. They don't seem ready for that yet despite all the hype, but you never know.

 

[tducey]

Lots of hype around Washington this year, don't see it but you never know.

 

[WizardHawk]

The problem with picking any team in the Pac is they all have some kind of flaw or significant concern.

UW is getting love mostly because they have the top defense in the conference and Petersen gets a lot of credit for things he did at BSU with less talent.

On paper the Huskies should have an improved offense, but one that is solid enough to run the conference? That remains to be seen. They need to actually go beat someone of substance before our fans will start believing any of this hype.

 

[Boise4Life]

The problem with picking any team in the Pac is they all have some kind of flaw or significant concern.

UW is getting love mostly because they have the top defense in the conference and Petersen gets a lot of credit for things he did at BSU with less talent.

On paper the Huskies should have an improved offense, but one that is solid enough to run the conference? That remains to be seen. They need to actually go beat someone of substance before our fans will start believing any of this hype.

I know must of those Boise guys were two and three stars coming out of high school, but make no mistake about it, Coach Pete had some straight up studs. Those teams, particularly the ones from around the 2008-2011ish era were absolutely loaded with talent.

 

[WizardHawk]

I know must of those Boise guys were two and three stars coming out of high school, but make no mistake about it, Coach Pete had some straight up studs. Those teams, particularly the ones from around the 2008-2011ish era were absolutely loaded with talent.

I wasn't insulting those teams, but there is a huge difference between running the table of the WAC or MWC and any of the P5's. He might be up for the task, but until someone sees him do it it's hard to have as much lofty hype as this team is getting. 8 wins and 7 wins in his first two years. Again, not saying it was his fault or anything, but this is what we know not think. Some pundits are calling them a dark horse for the playoffs. That's a stretch until proven otherwise.

If they go out and beat Stanford and Oregon then, and only then, will people up here start buying into it. They have a lot to shore up over last year to make that happen.

 

[Boise4Life]

I wasn't insulting those teams, but there is a huge difference between running the table of the WAC or MWC and any of the P5's. He might be up for the task, but until someone sees him do it it's hard to have as much lofty hype as this team is getting. 8 wins and 7 wins in his first two years. Again, not saying it was his fault or anything, but this is what we know not think. Some pundits are calling them a dark horse for the playoffs. That's a stretch until proven otherwise.

If they go out and beat Stanford and Oregon then, and only then, will people up here start buying into it. They have a lot to shore up over last year to make that happen.

I hope it happens and I get the strength of schedule/competition argument, but again particularly those 2008 to 2011 Boise teams had way more talent than the Washington Husky teams from the last couple of seasons just like they had way more talent than the very recent and present Boise teams. And I'm not saying UDub didn't field some very good players. For sure they did.

And I'm sure you'll disagree with all that and that's fine. But realize in those seasons I mention Boise went 6-3 against teams that finished ranked. The three games they lost were by 5 points total and two of those three games were lost by missing what would have been game winning chip shot field goals from very close range with no time left on the clock. In those seasons Boise also went 6-0 against AQ teams with four of those AQ teams they handled finishing in the top 20 and they kicked the absolute shit out of most of them. Damn near almost every starter and even some of the back ups from those teams ended up on 53 man NFL rosters. Like I said they were absolutely loaded. Now your Washington team from the past couple of years went 0-7 against teams who finished ranked and many of those games were not close, not competitive at all. Like I said, no comparison whatsoever.

So if you'd like to downplay the success from that era or say that the talent when you stack those teams up is even kind of close, be my guest. But those are the facts and the facts are it's not even a little bit close talentwise.

And as I say this, I realize Washington is getting better. They are in a damn fine conference with damn fine coaching and they are on the upswing. My Group of 5 team is not and nowhere remotely near where they once were and probably never will be again. Those are also facts and harsh realities. I acknowledge and accept that.

But as it relates to the excitement surrounding your program, I personally love it. I love Coach Pete. The man is all class, all the way and I hope this dude who put these predictions out there is right. We'll see.

 

[WizardHawk]

Again, didn't diss your team or the job he did there. It's just different. No other way to boil that down.

There's no doubt he had more experienced players in that era. He had the time to raise all of that talent from recruit to jr/sr. That's different than total talent, or at least talent potential. The kids he has he has only been with for 2 seasons and an extra off season. They might not have been able last year to beat one of those teams you speak of, but that doesn't equate to lessor talent. He has access to recruits now that even he has said he wouldn't have landed at BSU. That's the reality of teams/coaches moving up to this level. Ask Whittingham. He has waxed poetic about the differences.

For UW to live up to the hype, not only does Petersen have to show a lot more development with this group of kids within his systems/methods, but do so running a gauntlet beyond any he ever had to do then. Maybe he can, maybe not. We will see.

 

[Boise4Life]

And Coach Whittingham is right. It is obviously a different level. He didn't fair too well against Pete either. He had a good Utah team in Pete's first season in 2006 that talked a lot of trash leading up to the game in Salt Lake. They were not only guarantying a win but a lopsided one. What it ended up being was a 36 to 3 slapdown followed by a 26 to 3 ass whipping for his top 20 team in the bowl game a few years after that. That first season was also a fun one to remember. Beat end of year #21 Oregon State 42 to 14 and then of course the classic over end of year #11 and Big 12 champion Oklahoma at the Fiesta. What a start to a coaching career.

The good old days. I feel fortunate for it. He's a special coach. I think it's only a matter of time for Washington. It will be fun to see it all play out.

 

[Olyduck]

The problem with picking any team in the Pac is they all have some kind of flaw or significant concern.

UW is getting love mostly because they have the top defense in the conference and Petersen gets a lot of credit for things he did at BSU with less talent.

On paper the Huskies should have an improved offense, but one that is solid enough to run the conference? That remains to be seen. They need to actually go beat someone of substance before our fans will start believing any of this hype.

HAD the top defense in the conference. I guess if you are going on with the until proven otherwise they still have it, but new season so you never know.

 

[WizardHawk]

HAD the top defense in the conference. I guess if you are going on with the until proven otherwise they still have it, but new season so you never know.

HAVE because they have already proven it. They didn't lose much off of the unit they had last year. They don't need to do much to maintain the same level.

 

[Olyduck]

HAVE because they have already proven it. They didn't lose much off of the unit they had last year. They don't need to do much to maintain the same level.

again new year so you never know. really only Stanford could potentially take it from them, maybe Utah?

 

[WizardHawk]

again new year so you never know. really only Stanford could potentially take it from them, maybe Utah?

Right now today they have the top defense in the league. After the conference season opens who knows, but I feel entirely comfortable saying that.

In the context of this thread, it's the main reason they are getting so much hype. So bringing it up is entirely relevant.

 

[Olyduck]

Yeah they will still have it when conference play starts too. UW has by far the weakest nonconference schedule in the conference.