THE PAC 12 THREAD v.5

[blazer prophet]

That remains to be seen. We were the beneficiary of a down year in the North division this year as well. Caught Stanford off guard, ducks in the drink, Cal not really ready to get in the porch with the big dogs, Cougs shot themselves early and just weren't ready to really fight us in the AC.

Ducks should come at least somewhat back and be a tougher out, I don't expect Stanford to be down long, and Leach has something brewing over there.

Petersen has impressed so far and his classes have been solid. I do think he will be competitive year after year, but crazy things happen in college football. I'm not taking any of it for granted.

All true, but he's such a damn good coach that I think the future is great for you guys.

 

[WizardHawk]

If one player makes that much of a difference then your defense isn't that good. Maybe it plays good as a unit but one player isn't making Bamas defense good. You want to know about a good defense? USC one year couldn't start Clay Mathews Jr because Cushing and Malauga and Fili Moala were starters.

I said we don't have the depth, what fucking more do you want? You just like to read your own writing don't you?

This run is a year or two early and everyone agrees with that. It's why there is no real pressure on them in this game. It wasn't expected and they don't have the depth these higher programs do. They are more like USC a couple of years ago still coming off sanctions where they had some good players, but not really the depth.

Maybe because its the team that beat Washington. Zona and Utah might have been in the backfield in those games but they dont have Adoree and Biggie Marshall to play the WRs. It's the whole defense that gets it done. Utah and Zona might have a few athletes to give Washington trouble but USC had many more.

Bama isn't known for their secondary on the level of USC either. I'd fear yours far more than theirs. Ross WILL have a few break away plays in that game, but it won't be enough because they probably won't have enough of a run game to keep moving the ball.

 

[socaljim242]

That remains to be seen. We were the beneficiary of a down year in the North division this year as well. Caught Stanford off guard, ducks in the drink, Cal not really ready to get in the porch with the big dogs, Cougs shot themselves early and just weren't ready to really fight us in the AC.

Ducks should come at least somewhat back and be a tougher out, I don't expect Stanford to be down long, and Leach has something brewing over there.

Petersen has impressed so far and his classes have been solid. I do think he will be competitive year after year, but crazy things happen in college football. I'm not taking any of it for granted.

The north will be super competitive next couple years. Huskys , Stanford, WSU and ducks will probably be pretty decent next year

 

[WizardHawk]

The north will be super competitive next couple years. Huskys , Stanford, WSU and ducks will probably be pretty decent next year

Ducks might be two years from being at that level, but they for sure won't be a doormat like they were this year. They probably have some housecleaning to do. I watched a few of their post game pressers and they have some problem players on that roster. New staff will have to send a few of them packing. Their recruiting will have them back before too long, but it may be a couple of seasons to see them be as dangerous again.

 

[socaljim242]

I said we don't have the depth, what fucking more do you want? You just like to read your own writing don't you?

This run is a year or two early and everyone agrees with that. It's why there is no real pressure on them in this game. It wasn't expected and they don't have the depth these higher programs do. They are more like USC a couple of years ago still coming off sanctions where they had some good players, but not really the depth.

Bama isn't known for their secondary on the level of USC either. I'd fear yours far more than theirs. Ross WILL have a few break away plays in that game, but it won't be enough because they probably won't have enough of a run game to keep moving the ball.

I don't buy the next year is our year talk. Or we arrived a year early. You gotta go for it every year. because every year at least one unit is not up to par with the rest of the team. take Bama out of this because they are the only ones who can restock with just as good players as any who leave. It's rare you have a top defense coupled with a top offense. Even when Pete was rolling at USC he either had a great defense or he had an offense that hid the short comings of the defense. That year they played texas for the championship the defense was terrible but the offense was so good it hid that till Vince young happened.

 

[WizardHawk]

Question is the south finally catching up? Sure feels that way. If Utah had a QB this year they would have been killer. SC has one and is rising with him. Colorado made massive strides forward and has a solid QB behind their senior. UCLA was down a bit, but they still have a lot of talent and should bounce back.

 

[socaljim242]

Question is the south finally catching up? Sure feels that way. If Utah had a QB this year they would have been killer. SC has one and is rising with him. Colorado made massive strides forward and has a solid QB behind their senior. UCLA was down a bit, but they still have a lot of talent and should bounce back.

Well if you're talking competitive in the PAC or good enough to get to playoffs it's only USC right now in the South. Utah seems to be able to get units that are great like their d line or LBs but it stops there. Same with Colorado. They have done great and can with luck give USC and Utah a fight but it's really good units and smoke and mirrors with other units. UCLA is a mess. They get more talent than anyone not named USC or washington but cant put it together with Mora.

 

[WizardHawk]

I don't buy the next year is our year talk. Or we arrived a year early. You gotta go for it every year. because every year at least one unit is not up to par with the rest of the team. take Bama out of this because they are the only ones who can restock with just as good players as any who leave. It's rare you have a top defense coupled with a top offense. Even when Pete was rolling at USC he either had a great defense or he had an offense that hid the short comings of the defense. That year they played texas for the championship the defense was terrible but the offense was so good it hit that till Vince young happened.

This is year 3 man. The upperclassmen that are actually still left were Sark's and there aren't many of them. I believe they lose 4 total starters who were seniors after this year. Just one on offense.

I didn't say next year was our year, I said this was not expected because he hasn't had time to build that depth. They will have 3-4 other kids leaving early for the draft on top of the couple of seniors they are losing. No idea how they will look without Ross, Baker, Jones, King, etc.

You give any coach 5 years in college to have their brand fully established. Period. Their kids top to bottom with all those years of building up your philosophy in those kids.

Their depth will very much improve over the next two years as the last of Sark's kids leave and he has had that much more time to teach his seniors. Doesn't mean they reach this game again. Hard to do.

 

[WizardHawk]

Well if you're talking competitive in the PAC or good enough to get to playoffs it's only USC right now in the South. Utah seems to be able to get units that are great like their d line or LBs but it stops there. Same with Colorado. They have done great and can with luck give USC and Utah a fight but it's really good units and smoke and mirrors with other units. UCLA is a mess. They get more talent than anyone not named USC or washington but cant put it together with Mora.

Yes, right now I'm talking competitive in the Pac. The north has entirely dominated the conference since going to 12 teams. Stanford and Oregon owned it and now UW has reemerged to add another level of flavor to that mix. And while I don't think Leach makes the playoffs any time soon, his team is for sure dangerous in conference.

South has been a lot of next tier teams with occasional danger over that span.

I think you underestimate Utah. Williams is just not a good QB and I really haven't been impressed with most of their QB's in recent years. Wasn't a huge fan of Wilson either. If he ever had a solid QB that team would wreck people. Troy is the reason they lost to UW and really the ONLY reason they lost. He's just bad. I mean watched him sail a couple of short dump screen passes 5y over the receivers head ffs.

Next year just feels like the South might be ready to assert itself and get a few more wins against the North in league play. Win the conference? No idea. But I see a few tough outs next year.

 

[socaljim242]

This is year 3 man. The upperclassmen that are actually still left were Sark's and there aren't many of them. I believe they lose 4 total starters who were seniors after this year. Just one on offense.

I didn't say next year was our year, I said this was not expected because he hasn't had time to build that depth. They will have 3-4 other kids leaving early for the draft on top of the couple of seniors they are losing. No idea how they will look without Ross, Baker, Jones, King, etc.

You give any coach 5 years in college to have their brand fully established. Period. Their kids top to bottom with all those years of building up your philosophy in those kids.

Their depth will very much improve over the next two years as the last of Sark's kids leave and he has had that much more time to teach his seniors. Doesn't mean they reach this game again. Hard to do.

Look I'm just telling you what Ive seen watching college football. Unless you're saban and maybe Meyer you wont be able to field a team year to year with all units getting better and at the same level at the same time. I think Pete really only had one year like that. But every year there was one unit who wasn't up to par. One year its the O line another year its the D line another year its the LBs. Thats why I don't buy the next year will be our year talk I see from lots of fans. Because they think everything good from this season will stay and everything bad will be fixed because some players got experience. Once sarks players are gone , you know like half the team then you will level out to the the talent and coaching. Obviously Peterson is a really good coach and so far the recruiting is going well so I don't see you guys not being one of the top teams in the PAC for years to come. But I can guarantee you, some unit you think is in great shape will not play up to par or have an injury and expose depth issue and the rest of the units will have to overcome that and other teams will attack that spot. So thats what I mean when I say you have to go for it every year because next year isn't guaranteed to go like you think it will. I love the direction USC is going but they will probably lose Adoree and Juju so a step back even though other units might get better.

 

[socaljim242]

Yes, right now I'm talking competitive in the Pac. The north has entirely dominated the conference since going to 12 teams. Stanford and Oregon owned it and now UW has reemerged to add another level of flavor to that mix. And while I don't think Leach makes the playoffs any time soon, his team is for sure dangerous in conference.

South has been a lot of next tier teams with occasional danger over that span.

I think you underestimate Utah. Williams is just not a good QB and I really haven't been impressed with most of their QB's in recent years. Wasn't a huge fan of Wilson either. If he ever had a solid QB that team would wreck people. Troy is the reason they lost to UW and really the ONLY reason they lost. He's just bad. I mean watched him sail a couple of short dump screen passes 5y over the receivers head ffs.

Next year just feels like the South might be ready to assert itself and get a few more wins against the North in league play. Win the conference? No idea. But I see a few tough outs next year.

The south has been pretty crappy for quite a few seasons now. Utahs a nice team and so is Colorado. I just know that nationally they are never going to be a Michigan or Michigan State or Florida State or Clemson or LSU or Ohio State or even Penn state . They just can't get the whole roster to thier level. USC, Washington , Oregon if the get their shit together, and Stanford are the only one who can do that in the Pac . UCLA is just weird. They can get that type of talent and have more than Utah and Colorado right now but can't do shit with it.

 

[wazzu31]

Ladies, ladies, $C and UW are both gay, no gay on gay crime here.

 

[WizardHawk]

Look I'm just telling you what Ive seen watching college football. Unless you're saban and maybe Meyer you wont be able to field a team year to year with all units getting better and at the same level at the same time. I think Pete really only had one year like that. But every year there was one unit who wasn't up to par. One year its the O line another year its the D line another year its the LBs. Thats why I don't buy the next year will be our year talk I see from lots of fans. Because they think everything good from this season will stay and everything bad will be fixed because some players got experience. Once sarks players are gone , you know like half the team then you will level out to the the talent and coaching. Obviously Peterson is a really good coach and so far the recruiting is going well so I don't see you guys not being one of the top teams in the PAC for years to come. But I can guarantee you, some unit you think is in great shape will not play up to par or have an injury and expose depth issue and the rest of the units will have to overcome that and other teams will attack that spot. So thats what I mean when I say you have to go for it every year because next year isn't guaranteed to go like you think it will. I love the direction USC is going but they will probably lose Adoree and Juju so a step back even though other units might get better.

And you aren't getting why people are saying it. No one is saying everything good will stay so that's why next year. How are you not getting this? No one expected this now because he's had 3 years at this school to teach the kids that came in year one. Three years to undo Sark and instill his brand in those here 4 or 5 years. Three years to recruit his players and build up his brand.

That's not the same thing as saying next year for any other reason. He doesn't have his program fully established.

Petersen is a very exacting and very small detail kind of coach. That's not what Sark was and not what he was recruiting. The best of his kids have adapted and are playing at a high level, but he lost a lot of kids in the transition. Some transferred and some were kicked off the team. One that plays on Sundays now even. Many that played under him are backups now and never see the field. That first year was kind of dicey. So it's been two solid years of building up. Who wouldn't expect more with two more years to fully finish planting his flag on this program?

Again, that doesn't mean they reach the playoffs again in the next two years, but there is ZERO doubt the depth improves. That's 100% fact.

 

[WizardHawk]

The south has been pretty crappy for quite a few seasons now. Utahs a nice team and so is Colorado. I just know that nationally they are never going to be a Michigan or Michigan State or Florida State or Clemson or LSU or Ohio State or even Penn state . They just can't get the whole roster to thier level. USC, Washington , Oregon if the get their shit together, and Stanford are the only one who can do that in the Pac . UCLA is just weird. They can get that type of talent and have more than Utah and Colorado right now but can't do shit with it.

The reason I still list Colorado is their QB. We all knew the North would be down with only WSU and UW even having returning QB's on their opening day rosters. That kid behind Sefo is legit. And now they have a taste of not being a doormat.

Again, wasn't talking playoffs or national stage. Just talking North v South teams and who wins week to week in those. It's been very one sided for a while and it feels like that is leveling out. You have to win the Pac before you even discuss going to a playoff.

So many teams getting better just means any team running the table becomes that much tougher. That's why it's relevant to discuss. The more we have dangerous outs in conference, the tougher the road for any team is to reach that level. UW was able to take advantage of an off year in conference. I'm not betting that happens again next year for any top team. I don't see anyone running the table.

 

[socaljim242]

The reason I still list Colorado is their QB. We all knew the North would be down with only WSU and UW even having returning QB's on their opening day rosters. That kid behind Sefo is legit. And now they have a taste of not being a doormat.

Again, wasn't talking playoffs or national stage. Just talking North v South teams and who wins week to week in those. It's been very one sided for a while and it feels like that is leveling out. You have to win the Pac before you even discuss going to a playoff.

So many teams getting better just means any team running the table becomes that much tougher. That's why it's relevant to discuss. The more we have dangerous outs in conference, the tougher the road for any team is to reach that level. UW was able to take advantage of an off year in conference. I'm not betting that happens again next year for any top team. I don't see anyone running the table.

I agree that the competitive level has risen. Utah I could see , Colorado was a nice surprise but man the Arizona schools are really bad right now.

 

[WizardHawk]

I agree that the competitive level has risen. Utah I could see , Colorado was a nice surprise but man the Arizona schools are really bad right now.

What has always made the Pac so hard to run the table on is the diversity. You can dismiss teams like Utah that aren't ready to get up on the porch, but their style is so different from other teams and can trip you up if their match up presents you any problems. You just can't have a weak unit in the Pac and run the table because some team on your slate will match up well against that weakness and goon you. You better be deep and adaptable. On both sides of the ball.

 

[WizardHawk]

There isn't this unique blend of schemes in the SEC or B1G. Not nearly the diversity in either at their highest level.

 

[socaljim242]

What has always made the Pac so hard to run the table on is the diversity. You can dismiss teams like Utah that aren't ready to get up on the porch, but their style is so different from other teams and can trip you up if their match up presents you any problems. You just can't have a weak unit in the Pac and run the table because some team on your slate will match up well against that weakness and goon you. You better be deep and adaptable. On both sides of the ball.

Whats always made the PAC tough to run the table is that there are usually three our four NFL qbs scattered around that even on not so talented teams can beat better teams.

 

[socaljim242]

USC got a commitment from Pasadena Muir HS athlete Terrance Lang, 6-7" 280. He's listed as a 3* because he's only played two years of football (he's been a basketball player) and Muir doesn't play in the higher leagues here in So Cal. He's a project because of limited experience but the coaches are drooling at his potential. A big man with quick feet is a left tackle candidate but they are also talking DE or TE. Will be interesting.
“There will be a big learning curve and adjustment period for him for sure,” said Scout National Recruiting Analyst Greg Biggins. “The competition he plays against is a small step up above eight man football, so he's not a kid that should be expected to plug and play right away. But his long term potential is off the charts.”


USC recruited Lang to play on the defensive line, but Scout ranks Lang as an athlete for his raw potential overall.


“I'm curious where he starts out position wise,” said Biggins. “He can play anywhere on the defensive line and for as big as he is, I actually think he has the hands and mobility to play some tight end as well.


“Saying that, and he cringes when I mention this, I think offensive tackle and specifically left tackle is where his upside is the highest. He has a prototype left tackle frame, long arms and great feet.”

 

[TheDayMan]

With respect, I disagree. I watched that game and it could have been a 50 point blowout. USC's O-Line, D-Line and LB's were dominant. And Alabama's are better than USC's. Can UW win? Sure, anything is possible in the NCAA. But unless they know a way, aside from turnovers, to get substantially better on both lines and with their LB's, they will have a long night. That said, Peterson is a very good coach and understands how a David can beat a Goliath so it could be a really interesting game.

Naw.

They'd have to score 60+ points to make it a 50 point blowout. Our defense kept us in the game, so saying it could have been a 50 point blowout is pretty stupid...