THE PAC 12 THREAD v.5

[socaljim242]

Because you can't use the transitive property, solely, to rank teams. That's not how college football works.

You cant use head to head? LOL. They just played a week ago.

 

[Duckboy33]

You cant use head to head? LOL. They just played a week ago.

I've seen the teams play more than 1 game. Maybe as the season progresses, USC will show me more.

 

[WizardHawk]

Washington recovered, took you ten years but Washington recovered, and Oregon will too. A lesser time frame might be expected since they are well financed.

Money won't be the factor. You brought up 10 years, but why did it take that long? Because HC is literally everything in the college football. Period. And it wasn't 10 years because UW couldn't afford to get a top HC, it was because finding that right fit is super hard.

No one has any idea how long it will take Oregon to become what they were recently, if they do again. Chip Kelly was their best coach in the history of that program and finding the next one won't be easy.

 

[socaljim242]

I've seen the teams play more than 1 game. Maybe as the season progresses, USC will show me more.

Yet you put Colorado below USC after it's only conference loss. You need to actually watch the games.

 

[Duckboy33]

Yet you put Colorado below USC after it's only conference loss. You need to actually watch the games.

I've watched many of the games. If you want to do your own ranking, that's more than fine. If you want to discuss why teams are ranked where they are in my ranking, I'll have that conversation. I'm not going to keep talking to you if you're going to act like an asshat because you disagree with someone.

 

[socaljim242]

I've watched many of the games. If you want to do your own ranking, that's more than fine. If you want to discuss why teams are ranked where they are in my ranking, I'll have that conversation. I'm not going to keep talking to you if you're going to act like an asshat because you disagree with someone.

Good lord. This is being an ass? lol . If you're going to post your personal rankings, have the balls to to discuss and defend your opinion a least. I'm questioning why you'd rank ASU ahead of USC a week after USC had them 41 to 6 when garbage time came. If this simple question is too hard for you to logically answer or to aggressive of me for you for you then maybe you should find another more pc board because this is nothing compared to the talk that goes on here. Maybe come back when you're Duckman instead of duckboy

 

[Not Neutral]

I'd have to put WSU #2 right now. The always potent offense, now with running game balance, and they finally have some defense to go with it. Utah would be 3rd on my list. I'd probably put USC 4th based on how they are playing today.

You are not accounting for the intangibles. Despite being outplayed in every game, they have won five of them

Hows Arizona state ahead of USC?SC beat the sun devils easily. I saw it with my own eyes. It was 41 to 6 going in the fourth when USC put in the back ups. I realize USC dropped two conference games already but if this is power rankings you have to put USC ahead of ASU in my opinion.

Stuff power rankings SoCal, but you are right. But there are three teams in the South with one loss, likely one of which will not lose another. ASU is tied for the lead in the South with two other teams and one is not USC. No doubt when talking power, ASU is not on the list. ASU has played six games, outplayed in all but won five anyway. USC on the other hand is definitely the power in the South but just can't hack it because they are too cheap to pay a coach or hire an AD who knows how to do that. I think you piss the other team off often enough when everything stops while Adoree el al takes a bow for every play he is involved in. Last night ASU started with its QB on the bench hurt and played a freshman who also got hurt, ended with a running back at QB and won anyway. At one point, ASU had seven plays on third down for a total of minus 2 yards. So what has power got to do with it? ASU is at the head of the Luck rankings.

 

[WABLTY]

Money won't be the factor. You brought up 10 years, but why did it take that long? Because HC is literally everything in the college football. Period. And it wasn't 10 years because UW couldn't afford to get a top HC, it was because finding that right fit is super hard.

No one has any idea how long it will take Oregon to become what they were recently, if they do again. Chip Kelly was their best coach in the history of that program and finding the next one won't be easy.

ASU's been looking for about 40 years.

 

[socaljim242]

You are not accounting for the intangibles. Despite being outplayed in every game, they have won five of them

Stuff power rankings SoCal, but you are right. But there are three teams in the South with one loss, likely one of which will not lose another. ASU is tied for the lead in the South with two other teams and one is not USC. No doubt when talking power, ASU is not on the list. ASU has played six games, outplayed in all but won five anyway. USC on the other hand is definitely the power in the South but just can't hack it because they are too cheap to pay a coach or hire an AD who knows how to do that. I think you piss the other team off often enough when everything stops while Adoree el al takes a bow for every play he is involved in. Last night ASU started with its QB on the bench hurt and played a freshman who also got hurt, ended with a running back at QB and won anyway. At one point, ASU had seven plays on third down for a total of minus 2 yards. So what has power got to do with it? ASU is at the head of the Luck rankings.

Standings are one thing.Power rankings are another. If you watched the USC ASU game there's no logical way a week after you rank ASU ahead of USC.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

I'm a winner and I like myself today...

 

[Duckboy33]

Good lord. This is being an ass? lol . If you're going to post your personal rankings, have the balls to to discuss and defend your opinion a least. I'm questioning why you'd rank ASU ahead of USC a week after USC had them 41 to 6 when garbage time came. If this simple question is too hard for you to logically answer or to aggressive of me for you for you then maybe you should find another more pc board because this is nothing compared to the talk that goes on here. Maybe come back when you're Duckman instead of duckboy

USC beat ASU down but I've also seen scenarios where that doesn't necessarily mean that winning team has a better season. USC has this potential because they have a lot more talent than most teams in the PAC. And when they play well, they can dominate like they did last week. However, USC has been very inconsistent under Helton. One week they can blow out ASU, another week they can get completely shut down by a mediocre Stanford team. The key is finding that average for SC.

On the other hand, ASU is more consistent. Graham is a solid gameday coach and they are unlikely to lose a bunch of games to less talented teams. However, they also lack the top end talent needed to win the conference.

So I guess this is the easier way to put it, USC has the potential to be much better than ASU (we saw that last week) but they haven't shown that all season. Is that fair enough? Or are you just going to keep complaining and hurling insults?

 

[socaljim242]

USC beat ASU down but I've also seen scenarios where that doesn't necessarily mean that winning team has a better season. USC has this potential because they have a lot more talent than most teams in the PAC. And when they play well, they can dominate like they did last week. However, USC has been very inconsistent under Helton. One week they can blow out ASU, another week they can get completely shut down by a mediocre Stanford team. The key is finding that average for SC.

On the other hand, ASU is more consistent. Graham is a solid gameday coach and they are unlikely to lose a bunch of games to less talented teams. However, they also lack the top end talent needed to win the conference.

So I guess this is the easier way to put it, USC has the potential to be much better than ASU (we saw that last week) but they haven't shown that all season. Is that fair enough? Or are you just going to keep complaining and hurling insults?

Ummmthey lost to Stanford weeks ago. They blew out ASU last week. Trend us up not down. USC got trounced by Alabama, beat Utah State (doesnt prove anything) . Lost to Stanford, Put in a new freshman QB and looks much better against Utah, Beat ASU easily, now beat Colorado. Both were ranked . So can you see the trend? Usc up , ASU and Colorado down. Just sayin.

 

[wazzu31]

I'm a winner and I like myself today...

Should be partying it up, congrats on that win

 

[Duckboy33]

Ummmthey lost to Stanford weeks ago. They blew out ASU last week. Trend us up not down. USC got trounced by Alabama, beat Utah State (doesnt prove anything) . Lost to Stanford, Put in a new freshman QB and looks much better against Utah, Beat ASU easily, now beat Colorado. Both were ranked . So can you see the trend? Usc up , ASU and Colorado down. Just sayin.

That's fair to bring up the new QB. That has been a spark for SC. Another week or 2 of this and SC may jump up to #2.

 

[FORKWDEVIL]

ASU is 5 and 1 with NO QB, Great!

 

[socaljim242]

That's fair to bring up the new QB. That has been a spark for SC. Another week or 2 of this and SC may jump up to #2.

I dont know another team in the country whos played a ranked team every week except for one so far. And they still play Washington at home.
Darnod has been a spark for the offense. Yesterday three TDs to the TEs. If he spreads the ball around like that it's going to cause headaches for other teams trying to cover the WRs.

 

[Not Neutral]

Standings are one thing.Power rankings are another. If you watched the USC ASU game there's no logical way a week after you rank ASU ahead of USC.

So what do power rankings mean when you are first in power rankings and 4th in standings. Underachieving?

 

[WizardHawk]

You are not accounting for the intangibles. Despite being outplayed in every game, they have won five of them.

Power rankings to me means if they played head to head today who would I favor.

WSU lost to an FCS team and didn't look good against Boise State. Right now they look nearly unstoppable. The balance on both running and passing is new for them, or at least new this year. They won't be in the top 4 in defense, but it is now solid enough to give them comfortable leads against some decent offenses.

USC has also looked much improved over their first few weeks.

Right now I'd favor UW in any game and I'd favor WSU over any other team head to head on a neutral field. I'd obviously take USC vs ASU again so my rankings stand.

 

[TheDayMan]

How many days has it been since UW beat oregon?

0

 

[WizardHawk]

So what do power rankings mean when you are first in power rankings and 4th in standings. Underachieving?

Again, power means who would win TODAY head to head. It ignores how you played last month. Teams develop at different speeds and some improve while others degrade. It's a measuring stick in the now, not forecasting the future.

Clearly there is a lot of football left and teams lower down the rankings can still move up them and challenge for the CCG. The south to me is wide open. There are at least 3 teams that can make waves down there and maybe as many as 5.