THE PAC 12 THREAD v.5

[WizardHawk]

I agree with first half. would prob have Utah higher. Oregon state last.

You haven't spent much time in Pullman have you?

 

[Olyduck]

You haven't spent much time in Pullman have you?

1 game 1 time. but i have been to corvallis a few times. I would rather be in Pullman

 

[AlaskaGuy]

Can USC or Washington football string together dynasties after huge 2016 seasons?

 

[WizardHawk]

1 game 1 time. but i have been to corvallis a few times. I would rather be in Pullman

Corvallis isn't nearly as far from anything that resembles civilization. I mean Pullman is about as far from anything worth seeing or doing as is possible.

Corvallis is a relatively short drive from the ocean. The Palouse? Nothing. Not a damned thing.

 

[Olyduck]

Corvallis isn't nearly as far from anything that resembles civilization. I mean Pullman is about as far from anything worth seeing or doing as is possible.

Corvallis is a relatively short drive from the ocean. The Palouse? Nothing. Not a damned thing.

true but its still a shit hole town

 

[Olyduck]

Can USC or Washington football string together dynasties after huge 2016 seasons?

shouldn't USC have won something in order to have started a dynasty? yeah yeah we know Rose bowl #3 ranking blah blah blah. no division title no conference title no National title no dynasty

 

[WizardHawk]

shouldn't USC have won something in order to have started a dynasty? yeah yeah we know Rose bowl #3 ranking blah blah blah. no division title no conference title no National title no dynasty

I took the question posed on that article as more can last season push either/both into dynasties more than continue them. It was more asking do they look like teams that can string together seasons moving forward that dominate their division.

The cases for and against focused specifically just on each team and staff. USC's best case for a dynasty is there is no other team in the south that appears ready to create their own, or at least none anywhere near as close as it feels like USC is. A wide open division makes for an easier dynasty.

The biggest case against UW is Stanford and Oregon both having the talent to disrupt any run through the north. Sure, USC also plays Stanford every year so they add a little to their difficulty and they play Oregon 50% of the time as well, but they aren't measured against those teams for division ranking. And yes, I didn't add WSU as the always present disruptor and the odd big team killer game they seem to throw in most years. I'd still put them on par with UCLA and the other middle tier teams also fully capable of derailing perfect seasons.

On paper everyone is predicting UW and USC to face off in the CCG. I won't be shocked at all if either isn't in that game the way things go in Pac play. Still won't entirely eliminate the feel like either can string off a few solid years of top 10 play with how they are building up right now.

 

[socaljim242]

shouldn't USC have won something in order to have started a dynasty? yeah yeah we know Rose bowl #3 ranking blah blah blah. no division title no conference title no National title no dynasty

USC under Pete was a dynasty. Haters gonna hate.

 

[socaljim242]

I took the question posed on that article as more can last season push either/both into dynasties more than continue them. It was more asking do they look like teams that can string together seasons moving forward that dominate their division.

The cases for and against focused specifically just on each team and staff. USC's best case for a dynasty is there is no other team in the south that appears ready to create their own, or at least none anywhere near as close as it feels like USC is. A wide open division makes for an easier dynasty.

The biggest case against UW is Stanford and Oregon both having the talent to disrupt any run through the north. Sure, USC also plays Stanford every year so they add a little to their difficulty and they play Oregon 50% of the time as well, but they aren't measured against those teams for division ranking. And yes, I didn't add WSU as the always present disruptor and the odd big team killer game they seem to throw in most years. I'd still put them on par with UCLA and the other middle tier teams also fully capable of derailing perfect seasons.

On paper everyone is predicting UW and USC to face off in the CCG. I won't be shocked at all if either isn't in that game the way things go in Pac play. Still won't entirely eliminate the feel like either can string off a few solid years of top 10 play with how they are building up right now.

USC will play Stanford and Oregon combined at least six times in most four year cycles. But Alabama has had Georgia scheduled twice in almost ten years. Fking crazy.

 

[WizardHawk]

USC will play Stanford and Oregon combined at least six times in most four year cycles. But Alabama has had Georgia scheduled twice in almost ten years. Fking crazy.

Yeah, While UW does have Stanford and Oregon every year and UCLA or USC every year, USC does get to face both Stanford and UCLA every single year on top of an always top notch OOC slate. Neither UW nor USC has a cake walk to an undefeated season. So both have serious challenges every year to a playoff run. No slam dunk either makes it.

Purely in terms of just divisional dominance only, USC has the slight edge with none of the other 5 looking like 1 or 2 loss serious challengers.

 

[socaljim242]

Yeah, While UW does have Stanford and Oregon every year and UCLA or USC every year, USC does get to face both Stanford and UCLA every single year on top of an always top notch OOC slate. Neither UW nor USC has a cake walk to an undefeated season. So both have serious challenges every year to a playoff run. No slam dunk either makes it.

Purely in terms of just divisional dominance only, USC has the slight edge with none of the other 5 looking like 1 or 2 loss serious challengers.

I agree. UCLA is Jekll and Hyde . They could be a 9 win team and they can be a 6 win team but Stanford is a good bet to put up a good fight. They do get Washington USC and Oregon so for them it's no easy task.

 

[WizardHawk]

Man, I want to see wazzy again talk shit about UW's OOC slate...
Washington State sets non-conference football schedule through 2021, adds series with SDSU

2017 - Montana State, Boise State, Nevada - Nothing spectacular, but a little something with Boise anyway
2018 - @ Wyoming, San Jose State, Eastern Washington -
2019 - New Mexico State, Northern Colorado, @ Huston -
2020 - @ Utah State, Huston, Idaho (Will be a FCS team as they are dropping out of FBS) -
2021 - Utah State, Portland State, BYU - I mean at least BYU has a chance to have a pulse, but really.

Beyond that they have a H/H with Wisky in 22/23 and that's the only team with a pulse on their long term slate.

Not one single P5 opponent on their OOC schedule for the next 5 full seasons. Not one.



In before...
But Boise State > Rutgers. No shit. No one is happy here with this bullshit schedule the last two years. Over that same 5 years UW will have played Auburn and two games against Michigan as well as a couple of games with BYU.

“We have worked diligently to complete future football schedules that provide opportunities for our program to succeed, while also giving our fans quality opponents in Martin Stadium,” said Washington State Director of Athletics Bill Moos in the release. “That has been accomplished through 2021, while also giving Cougar fans seven games in Martin Stadium four times over the next five years. Beyond that we have tremendous nonconference opponents scheduled for home-and-home contests in future years.”

To provide opportunities for our program to succeed... In other words, as bad as we are in playing OOC we took the easiest road we could to putting up W's for as far out as we could schedule.

 

[Olyduck]

USC under Pete was a dynasty. Haters gonna hate.

in the pac it was like a dynasty. what was it 7 titles 3 shared? and one of the out rights was vacated

 

[socaljim242]

in the pac it was like a dynasty. what was it 7 titles 3 shared?

I'm not going to argue with you.lol. From 2002 till the year before Pete left USC was the shit. it was college football must see.

 

[DHoey]

USC under Pete was a dynasty. Haters gonna hate.

I'm not going to argue with you.lol. From 2002 till the year before Pete left USC was the shit. it was college football must see.

7 years straight of being ranked in the top 5, 4 rose bowls and 2 Orange bowls. Makes the Ducks blip on the radar look, like well, a blip on the radar.

It's a damn shame that USC didn't get more titles out of that run.

 

[socaljim242]

7 years straight of being ranked in the top 5, 4 rose bowls and 2 Orange bowls. Makes the Ducks blip on the radar look, like well, a blip on the radar.

It's a damn shame that USC didn't get more titles out of that run.

Southern and east coast bias. That team with sanchez had the one loss on the road against WSU and they were denied a shot at the title. That one year they were #1 in both polls , won the last game , Oklahoma lost their last game 35-7 but because the coaches had to vote for the higher team spit out by the computer Oklahoma was moved to the top spot and LSU was given the #2. So USC without losing went from #1 in both human polls to #3.

 

[wazzu31]

Don't bet the farm on that one (see what I did there).
Stanford has solid players on both lines which always make them a threat and their single biggest questionmark is replacing the productivity at RB after CM left. They have a lot of talent returning from a defense that came together after the losses to UW and WSU and held firm. They are replacing a pass rusher and I think one from the secondary, but they did lose a lot of depth and may be thin at some key positions so they better stay healthy.

They were not very good in the passing game last year and that's why people will write them off, but that may be a bit premature.

I like our chances right now on paper, but anyone not taking them seriously as a dangerous and real contender in the conference this year is not paying attention to what Shaw does down there.

Na, I think they will still be a decent team but won't beat anyone noteworthy unless that team is decimated. If they find a QB that could actually start on a Big Sky team then I'll take them seriously.

 

[wazzu31]

You haven't spent much time in Pullman have you?

Don't be jealous. Pullman is where people learn to be men, Muttlake is where you if you still are stuck on your mommies tit. You can disrespect God's country.

 

[wazzu31]

USC under Pete was a dynasty. Haters gonna hate.

Pete was 0-2 against Mike Price.

 

[socaljim242]

Pete was 0-2 against Mike Price.

Dont remind me.lol. Brutal.