THE PAC 12 THREAD v.5

[Olyduck]

College Football News (CFN) releases their PAC12 bowl projections:

College Football Playoff: Rose Bowl
Washington Huskies vs. Florida State Seminoles (Oh hell yes. Bring on the Roses baby!!!)

New Year’s Six: Fiesta Bowl
USC Trojans vs. Wisconsin Badgers

New Year’s Six: Cotton Bowl
Stanford Cardinal vs. Oklahoma Sooners

1. Valero Alamo Bowl
Oregon Ducks vs. Big 12

2. National University Holiday Bowl
UCLA Bruins vs. Iowa Hawkeyes

3. Foster Farms Bowl
Washington State Cougars vs. Northwestern Wildcats

4. Hyundai Sun Bowl
Utah Utes vs. Virginia Tech Hokies

5. Las Vegas Bowl
Arizona Wildcats vs. Boise State Broncos

6. Cactus Bowl
Arizona State Sun Devils vs. West Virginia Mountaineers

This makes no sense. Oregon is a dumpster fire and couldn't possibly get to the Alamo bowl from what all you guys keep telling us

 

[socaljim242]

This makes no sense. Oregon is a dumpster fire and couldn't possibly get to the Alamo bowl from what all you guys keep telling us

I remember about three seasons ago when everyone was telling Duck fans the ride was over, the decline had begun.

 

[WizardHawk]

This makes no sense. Oregon is a dumpster fire and couldn't possibly get to the Alamo bowl from what all you guys keep telling us

I have the ducks somewhere between 6-6 and 8-4 this coming season. I expect bowl eligible. That's still not 10-2 to 12-0 as was the expectation during your little run. That's not basement, but it's nowhere near the penthouse either. They have the talent to be dangerous and upset better teams. New staff, new schemes, questionable depth in places, and overall inexperience in a few roles might not allow them to reach the win totals their talent suggests they should.

Very difficult to predict which teams will make which bowls. Most expect UW, USC, and Stanford to be powers and make high level bowls. After that are several unknowns. WSU, UCLA, Utah, and Oregon are all wildcards. Any might upset and help derail the expected top 3 or they could collapse and fall. One of them might reach higher than expected, but which one?

This list has UW>USC while most have it the other way around and they also pick Oregon to top out that 'group of 4' of interest for next year. I'd expect that order of those 4 to be different on other predictions as well.

 

[Olyduck]

I have the ducks somewhere between 6-6 and 8-4 this coming season. I expect bowl eligible. That's still not 10-2 to 12-0 as was the expectation during your little run. That's not basement, but it's nowhere near the penthouse either. They have the talent to be dangerous and upset better teams. New staff, new schemes, questionable depth in places, and overall inexperience in a few roles might not allow them to reach the win totals their talent suggests they should.

Very difficult to predict which teams will make which bowls. Most expect UW, USC, and Stanford to be powers and make high level bowls. After that are several unknowns. WSU, UCLA, Utah, and Oregon are all wildcards. Any might upset and help derail the expected top 3 or they could collapse and fall. One of them might reach higher than expected, but which one?

This list has UW>USC while most have it the other way around and they also pick Oregon to top out that 'group of 4' of interest for next year. I'd expect that order of those 4 to be different on other predictions as well.

Oregon goes 10+wins 7 years in a row end capped by 9 win seasons and its a little run
USC did 7 seasons in a row of 10+wins (yes including a vacated) one time in school history.
Washington still trying to just put more than 2 10+ win seasons together for the first time ever.
Bama is at 9 season with 10 or more wins and had never done 7 before this run
Ohio State's longest run was 5 with 10 or more wins.
Michigan 4 seasons
notre Dame 2 seasons
Texas had 1 run of 9 seasons under brown and never hit 7 in a row before that.

but na yeah you right its just a little run

 

[mcnabb7542]

This makes no sense. Oregon is a dumpster fire and couldn't possibly get to the Alamo bowl from what all you guys keep telling us

No the dumpster fire was last season, there is no way in hell they repeat that....
Defense is still work in progress approach but the offense should be just fine....


All joking aside I could see them push 9 to 10 wins depending on the "buy in" of the players with Willie's style..

 

[WizardHawk]

Oregon goes 10+wins 7 years in a row end capped by 9 win seasons and its a little run
USC did 7 seasons in a row of 10+wins (yes including a vacated) one time in school history.
Washington still trying to just put more than 2 10+ win seasons together for the first time ever.
Bama is at 9 season with 10 or more wins and had never done 7 before this run
Ohio State's longest run was 5 with 10 or more wins.
Michigan 4 seasons
notre Dame 2 seasons
Texas had 1 run of 9 seasons under brown and never hit 7 in a row before that.

but na yeah you right its just a little run

@ triggered over rival language.

It's a "little run" in terms of the overall history of the program. It's a total outlier and we have been over this. Just like the last decade or so for UW has been an outlier of a different type.

If you want to pound your chest over beating up on a down Pac10/12 when the historic powers of the conference were simultaneously going through their worst cycles then by all means you go boy.

 

[socaljim242]

Oregon goes 10+wins 7 years in a row end capped by 9 win seasons and its a little run
USC did 7 seasons in a row of 10+wins (yes including a vacated) one time in school history.
Washington still trying to just put more than 2 10+ win seasons together for the first time ever.
Bama is at 9 season with 10 or more wins and had never done 7 before this run
Ohio State's longest run was 5 with 10 or more wins.
Michigan 4 seasons
notre Dame 2 seasons
Texas had 1 run of 9 seasons under brown and never hit 7 in a row before that.

but na yeah you right its just a little run

One time in school history? Come on now. lol. How many times has USC won the conference? How many Rose Bowl wins? How many Heismans? How many National Championships.Pete had some great years but it's not the only time USCs been good. USC has more than twice the Rose Bowl wins since 2000 than Oregon has in it's history and thats with four years of sanctions included..

 

[WizardHawk]

One time in school history? Come on now. lol. How many times has USC won the conference? How many Rose Bowl wins? How many Heismans? How many National Championships.Pete had some great years but it's not the only time USCs been good. USC has more than twice the Rose Bowl wins since 2000 than Oregon has in it's history and thats with four years of sanctions included..

But there is no college history prior to Chip. Didn't you get the memo?

 

[socaljim242]

But there is no college history prior to Chip. Didn't you get the memo?

Yup I know. College football began with Chip being hired. And seriously , Alabama still has more Rose Bowl wins than Oregon. I try not to even point that out on the main board because it's pathetic. Maybe with their next big "run" they can catch up to the Tide.

 

[Olyduck]

One time in school history? Come on now. lol. How many times has USC won the conference? How many Rose Bowl wins? How many Heismans? How many National Championships.Pete had some great years but it's not the only time USCs been good. USC has more than twice the Rose Bowl wins since 2000 than Oregon has in it's history and thats with four years of sanctions included..

Please go back and read carefully. No where did I say it was the only time they were good. this has nothing to do with titles, conference or national. nothing to do with heismans. nothing to do with Rose Bowls.
10+ win seasons in a row. Oregon's "little run" was 7 in a row. so that's the number I used to compare. USC has 1 run of 7 seasons with 10+ wins

 

[WizardHawk]

That settles it then. Ducks are on the same footing history wise as USC.

 

[trojanfan12]

@ triggered over rival language.

It's a "little run" in terms of the overall history of the program. It's a total outlier and we have been over this. Just like the last decade or so for UW has been an outlier of a different type.

If you want to pound your chest over beating up on a down Pac10/12 when the historic powers of the conference were simultaneously going through their worst cycles then by all means you go boy.

Exactly. I will say though, that the ability of Ducks fans to ignore the entire history of college football outside of their little run is truly something to behold.

 

[Olyduck]

That settles it then. Ducks are on the same footing history wise as USC.

didn't say that either. you guys are really good at reading comprehension.
7 seasons of 10+ wins is 7 seasons of 10+ wins. Both schools have done it 1 time.
even if this was the only time Oregon was ever good (it isn't) it happened. and it's not something the traditional power houses are doing all the time either.
to call it a "little run" when the "Pac 12 traditional power" Washington has never even got close, USC has done it 1 time in school history, Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame have never done it is underselling the difficulty it is to do so.

 

[Olyduck]

Exactly. I will say though, that the ability of Ducks fans to ignore the entire history of college football outside of their little run is truly something to behold.

actually I went through the entire history. in those schools entire histories that was how many times they had "little runs" of 7 seasons with 10+ wins.

 

[trojanfan12]

actually I went through the entire history. in those schools entire histories that was how many times they had "little runs" of 7 seasons with 10+ wins.

What you are ignoring though is that USC has a long history of very good teams. Oregon doesn't. As has been pointed out, Oregon being a good run of success is an outlier. USC having good runs, isn't.

If Oregon just returns to being mediocre or worse, then what they have accomplished is nothing more than a nice little run that didn't even get them a national championship. It's nice for Ducks fans to be able to point to, but it's essentially meaningless in the history of college football.

Now, if the Ducks are able to get back to that higher level, then it starts to mean something.

All of those programs that Ducks fans want to consider themselves part of, have long histories of winning and of being able to come back from down times. Oregon doesn't yet.

 

[WizardHawk]

One 7 year span over 100 years of body of work.

We get it. No, we really get it.

 

[WizardHawk]

didn't say that either. you guys are really good at reading comprehension.
7 seasons of 10+ wins is 7 seasons of 10+ wins. Both schools have done it 1 time.
even if this was the only time Oregon was ever good (it isn't) it happened. and it's not something the traditional power houses are doing all the time either.
to call it a "little run" when the "Pac 12 traditional power" Washington has never even got close, USC has done it 1 time in school history, Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame have never done it is underselling the difficulty it is to do so.

And this point has been debunked many times already.

Sure, UW didn't run the same mini streak during any of their prior runs (plural, not singular). UW also didn't have the luxury of USC on sanctions and decimated program during them. They had road blocks beyond a nerd school with a semi challenging running game to impede their progress. UW picked a totally fucky time to hit the basement and didn't have the same opportunity the ducks did.

The other schools you mention all have blue blood or solid rivals that at least get in the way here and there. The ducks were almost entirely the product of circumstances of the perfect storm with that particular streak.

The party is over. The powers are back in the saddle again. No more easy peasy runs to the top for the ducks. You now have Stanford, UW, AND USC as well as the odd middle tier team that might bite you. That's a far cry from that same path a few short years ago.

 

[DHoey]

I would be willing to bet that 95% off all 10 win seasons in college football history have come since the BCS era.

 

[Olyduck]

What you are ignoring though is that USC has a long history of very good teams. Oregon doesn't. As has been pointed out, Oregon being a good run of success is an outlier. USC having good runs, isn't.

If Oregon just returns to being mediocre or worse, then what they have accomplished is nothing more than a nice little run that didn't even get them a national championship. It's nice for Ducks fans to be able to point to, but it's essentially meaningless in the history of college football.

Now, if the Ducks are able to get back to that higher level, then it starts to mean something.

All of those programs that Ducks fans want to consider themselves part of, have long histories of winning and of being able to come back from down times. Oregon doesn't yet.

having a history of good teams doesn't change the fact that the run of 7 seasons is the same for both. having good or bad teams in 1956, 1973, 1981 and 1982 don't matter for either teams streak of 7 seasons. its hard to do for any team. doesn't matter if you have pedigree or not. calling it "little" undermines the feat.

Oregon's "little run" of 7 seasons with 10+ wins is little because they had never been a traditionally good team
but USC's only run of 7 seasons with 10+ wins in a row is not called little because they have had good teams in the past.
runs of 7+ seasons of 10+ wins doesn't happen often so when it does calling it a "little run" just comes off as ignorant and petty.

 

[Olyduck]

What you are ignoring though is that USC has a long history of very good teams. Oregon doesn't. As has been pointed out, Oregon being a good run of success is an outlier. USC having good runs, isn't.

If Oregon just returns to being mediocre or worse, then what they have accomplished is nothing more than a nice little run that didn't even get them a national championship. It's nice for Ducks fans to be able to point to, but it's essentially meaningless in the history of college football.

Now, if the Ducks are able to get back to that higher level, then it starts to mean something.

All of those programs that Ducks fans want to consider themselves part of, have long histories of winning and of being able to come back from down times. Oregon doesn't yet.

Oregon in the 2000s were up then down then up then down then back up for a number of years.