The PAC12 THREAD v.2

[RegentDenali]

Am I the only one that isnt sure that if Michigan State loses they wont fall out of the Rose? I mean they could lose enough ranking to not get an at large. then what who does the Rose take to replace Ohio State then?

If they get absolutely blown out by the Bucks, they might drop more than 4 spots, but if it's a close loss, I believe at this point, they won't drop more than 4 spots.

 

[Ironbreaker]

Am I the only one that isnt sure that if Michigan State loses they wont fall out of the Rose? I mean they could lose enough ranking to not get an at large. then what who does the Rose take to replace Ohio State then?

They will be 10-2. They are going to the Rose Bowl win or lose.

There hasn't been a 10-2 AQ team to finish ranked less than 14th in the BCS era. At least back to the 2002 season. Thats as far as espin keeps track.

 

[Ironbreaker]

They will be 10-2. They are going to the Rose Bowl win or lose.

There hasn't been a 10-2 AQ team to finish ranked less than 14th in the BCS era. At least back to the 2002 season. Thats as far as espin keeps track.

11-2 actually.

 

[RegentDenali]

Normally I'd say "fuck no" to an undeserving Oregon team getting into a BCS bowl. But the thought of getting to watch their raping at the hands of Alabama might be too much to pass up.

While of course it would give me a perverse level of pleasure to watch the Ducks get their shit packed up to their skulls by Bama at the Orange bowl because I give that at least a 90% chance of the outcome, I still want them at the Alamo or Holiday bowl.

Ducks fans greatest pastime is cherry picking their stats. It must be an elective course at Nike U. And win or choke, they love their claims about how many BCS games they've been to in a row, while of course never bringing up if they were loses.

I want DAT and the rest of the drunk on bought success Kardashian IQ preschoolers who think the Rose Bowl is beneath them, to end their college careers neither at the Rose, or any other BCS game. A loss in a non-BCS bowl is exactly what they deserve after the NCAA investigation exposed what they were up to. Especially DAT and the last of the purchased St. Kelly boys.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Am I the only one that isnt sure that if Michigan State loses they wont fall out of the Rose? I mean they could lose enough ranking to not get an at large. then what who does the Rose take to replace Ohio State then?

Alabama

 

[mcnabb7542]

Alabama

didn't that happen a couple of years ago before starting the CCG? Wasn't it Texas that replaced a B10 team or Pac12 team???

 

[asu_08]

Alabama

Doesn't the Orange Bowl get first pick? They'd likely take Alabama before the Rose Bowl can. I heard in that scenario the Rose would most likely pick Baylor.

 

[WizardHawk]

I'd still like to see a Tui led Wash team win it's bowl. For the seniors who deserve it. For any extra hardware for the trophy case. For Husky Pride. To rep the PAC. Plenty to play for.

I didn't say I don't care if they win their bowl, I said which bowl they go to and whatnot is far less important today than it was before Sark bailed. We want to see them do well in a bowl and a win would be awesome. Just not sure how realistic that would be. Not only have they lost Sark, but most of the coaching staff. They have to make a game plan and practice it and then to execute it all without the architect of that program and systems. That's a lot of change.

 

[Not Neutral]

I think Sark can win at USC. I want him to fail but I think with the talent USC attracts it is difficult for him to lose. I don't think Sark is a great coach, but he is not a bad coach either. I think he falls in the average range, which with his recruiting abilities and assistant coaches should be enough to win at USC.

As far as Petersen's recruiting ability goes I think he should be fine. Bringing in top talent is obviously important but I think classes are defined by the gems you find. Petersen has always seemed to win with the talent given to him, which is not much. Plus, he should find it much easier selling people on UW instead of Boise State.

If you look at UW's past recruiting history the biggest thing you notice is that there are plenty of lower rated recruits who made a difference and plenty of higher rated ones who never did a damn thing.

With the massive pool of high school football players to recruit from, it is not difficult to find those gems. Something that Petersen has seemed to excel at while at Boise State.

We know that Petersen won more than 50 straight games at BSU which did a lot to build his reputation. No doubt that took two things: coaching ability and lack of real competition. Which was most important? Another thing that would bother me was that two previous well known Boise coaches hired into the PAC did not do so well; in fact, one destroyed a program. Anyone recruiting in the PAC 12 faces a lot of competition, not so much when recruiting for Boise against teams of the mid-majors. His record this year is not so good and no one else to answer for it. He did win two BCS bowls and many controversial first games, all which he had an extended time to prepare, but he lost the biggest game of his tenure because his team could not play into the fourth quarter. As he is in the North, I won't have any problem rooting for Petersen and UW against the two 800 lb gorillas, but I can't see him displacing either more than anyone in the South is likely to displace USC. Coach Petersen's reputation is that of a great person, and he is indeed, but a lot of that reputation is because he has resisted the siren calls of the AQ schools. I was glad when he passed up an opportunity to coach at ASU because we went with Koetter from BSU before for the same reasons. UW is a great program and Petersen is no doubt a great coach, but he is losing many advantages he had at BSU. Just my opinions of course.

 

[Not Neutral]

oregon vs bama - orange bowl?? too soon?

Yes!!! We want Oregon-Bama. Who really is #2?

 

[Not Neutral]

If both teams play well I agree. I hate seeing a deserving team be punished for playing in the CCG.

Like your thinking, Day Man.

 

[WizardHawk]

We know that Petersen won more than 50 straight games at BSU which did a lot to build his reputation. No doubt that took two things: coaching ability and lack of real competition. Which was most important? Another thing that would bother me was that two previous well known Boise coaches hired into the PAC did not do so well; in fact, one destroyed a program. Anyone recruiting in the PAC 12 faces a lot of competition, not so much when recruiting for Boise against teams of the mid-majors. His record this year is not so good and no one else to answer for it. He did win two BCS bowls and many controversial first games, all which he had an extended time to prepare, but he lost the biggest game of his tenure because his team could not play into the fourth quarter. As he is in the North, I won't have any problem rooting for Petersen and UW against the two 800 lb gorillas, but I can't see him displacing either more than anyone in the South is likely to displace USC. Coach Petersen's reputation is that of a great person, and he is indeed, but a lot of that reputation is because he has resisted the siren calls of the AQ schools. I was glad when he passed up an opportunity to coach at ASU because we went with Koetter from BSU before for the same reasons. UW is a great program and Petersen is no doubt a great coach, but he is losing many advantages he had at BSU. Just my opinions of course.

As I have said many times already, every candidate not already a D1 HC would have had some concern and unknowns. Every single one.

What we do know about Petersen is he was outstanding at recruiting at the mid-major level and he carried a lot of the traits I look for in a head coach. He has a strong sense of discipline. His teams were known for not making a lot of stupid penalties. He is a strong motivator and teacher. He got the very most out of the talent he had available to him. He was great at preparing for games and having his kids ready to play both home and away.

If you go back and look at the video of Don James speaking about college football the thing he spoke of the most was education and shaping the kids into men. Football was always the last thing he spoke of. Petersen does so as well.

As for the prior BSU HC not making it at the major level, first of all both of them went into situations far different than this one. I mean taking over an all but dead Colorado program? Petersen is coming in at the perfect time here. UW hasn't been a top 25 team in a decade, but has been on the build up. He won't be under as much pressure as if Sark has actually been winning 10 games, but he has the players to get there fast if they all buy in.

To suggest Petersen is likely to fall the same was as the prior two would be to say that somehow it is BSU itself that is killing their coaching? The reality is it is always a crap shoot when you are taking people from lower ranks or who are coordinators with no HC experience. Some make it and some don't. What you pay your AD's for is to find the best candidates with the most likelihood of success and give them the tools to reach it. Woodward has done that in spades.

 

[Not Neutral]

Lots of truth to that.

If ASU would have beaten ND this wouldnt be an issue if they lose.

But hey, Stanford losing 3 in conference... Comes with the territory of this CCG bidness.

Just like the SEC. CCG loser wont go, Bama will.

Just seems a team shouldnt be punished for losing an "extra" game.

You mentioned that before Mamba. But I never thought at that time it would ever reach a point where the ND loss would matter. Damn if you weren't right all along, which means you must have had a pretty good idea that things could fall at they did. You do know what you are talking about. You also said, the Devils will take them". Hope you can be right just one more time at least.

 

[Not Neutral]

As I have said many times already, every candidate not already a D1 HC would have had some concern and unknowns. Every single one.

What we do know about Petersen is he was outstanding at recruiting at the mid-major level and he carried a lot of the traits I look for in a head coach. He has a strong sense of discipline. His teams were known for not making a lot of stupid penalties. He is a strong motivator and teacher. He got the very most out of the talent he had available to him. He was great at preparing for games and having his kids ready to play both home and away.

If you go back and look at the video of Don James speaking about college football the thing he spoke of the most was education and shaping the kids into men. Football was always the last thing he spoke of. Petersen does so as well.

As for the prior BSU HC not making it at the major level, first of all both of them went into situations far different than this one. I mean taking over an all but dead Colorado program? Petersen is coming in at the perfect time here. UW hasn't been a top 25 team in a decade, but has been on the build up. He won't be under as much pressure as if Sark has actually been winning 10 games, but he has the players to get there fast if they all buy in.

To suggest Petersen is likely to fall the same was as the prior two would be to say that somehow it is BSU itself that is killing their coaching? The reality is it is always a crap shoot when you are taking people from lower ranks or who are coordinators with no HC experience. Some make it and some don't. What you pay your AD's for is to find the best candidates with the most likelihood of success and give them the tools to reach it. Woodward has done that in spades.

Never suggested or expected he would. But you know the old saying, things happen in threes. Cited merely as a concern after the fact. Don't believe anything, now, after the fact, that history would suggest anything but a success for Pete wherever he is, just to what extent. What I should have mentioned was the fact that he was so highly sought after all across the country there must be some fire under all that smoke.

 

[WizardHawk]

I just look at it differently. We won't know what kind of Pac coach he is until he has been one for a few years so all we can judge this hire on now is the quality of the things we do know measured against the same in other candidates and right now I can't find an example of anyone better that he didn't take. I had Petersen above Mora.

Coach Pete will either improve on the building blocks that Sark has left, or he will have a short tenure here and we will move on. But just as a potential and measuring against what else was available, this was a really good pick up for Scott Woodward and UW.

 

[Not Neutral]

I just look at it differently. We won't know what kind of Pac coach he is until he has been one for a few years so all we can judge this hire on now is the quality of the things we do know measured against the same in other candidates and right now I can't find an example of anyone better that he didn't take. I had Petersen above Mora.

Coach Pete will either improve on the building blocks that Sark has left, or he will have a short tenure here and we will move on. But just as a potential and measuring against what else was available, this was a really good pick up for Scott Woodward and UW.

 

[trojanfan12]

Normally I'd say "fuck no" to an undeserving Oregon team getting into a BCS bowl. But the thought of getting to watch their raping at the hands of Alabama might be too much to pass up.

Roooooollllll Tide Roll!!

 

[wazzu31]

As I have said many times already, every candidate not already a D1 HC would have had some concern and unknowns. Every single one.

What we do know about Petersen is he was outstanding at recruiting at the mid-major level and he carried a lot of the traits I look for in a head coach. He has a strong sense of discipline. His teams were known for not making a lot of stupid penalties. He is a strong motivator and teacher. He got the very most out of the talent he had available to him. He was great at preparing for games and having his kids ready to play both home and away.

If you go back and look at the video of Don James speaking about college football the thing he spoke of the most was education and shaping the kids into men. Football was always the last thing he spoke of. Petersen does so as well.

As for the prior BSU HC not making it at the major level, first of all both of them went into situations far different than this one. I mean taking over an all but dead Colorado program? Petersen is coming in at the perfect time here. UW hasn't been a top 25 team in a decade, but has been on the build up. He won't be under as much pressure as if Sark has actually been winning 10 games, but he has the players to get there fast if they all buy in.

To suggest Petersen is likely to fall the same was as the prior two would be to say that somehow it is BSU itself that is killing their coaching? The reality is it is always a crap shoot when you are taking people from lower ranks or who are coordinators with no HC experience. Some make it and some don't. What you pay your AD's for is to find the best candidates with the most likelihood of success and give them the tools to reach it. Woodward has done that in spades.

Not sure how Petersen will do in the long run but I think at least in the short term he should excel. He has proven he can outcoach with lesser talent and UW has a ton of talent. Unknowns on recruiting and week in and week out coaching in the toughest conference in the nation but I think this is an upgrade over Sark for the next few seasons.

 

[seahawksfan234]

Kind of surprised there are concerns over Petersen's recruiting ability.

I mean the dude was recruiting at freaking Boise State University. How many kids want to live in Idaho? He had to pick from talent that was viewed as not good enough to be in the PAC-12 and he still won with it. I think that speaks to his ability to find gems that are overlooked by the bigger programs.

Take his scouting abilities, give him a school with all of the advantages of UW and I think he will excel getting UW the talent it needs to win.

I mean just look at this:

Boise State's recruiting classes are never ranked highly but they have had more players drafted than UW, UCLA, Oregon State, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado. Only PAC-12 teams with more players sent to the NFL draft than Boise State since 2010 are Cal, Oregon, Stanford and USC. So it was obvious that Chris Petersen was bringing NFL caliber talent to Boise State, and he was finding guys who were not highly rated by most mainstream high school scouting agencies.

 

[WizardHawk]

Kind of surprised there are concerns over Petersen's recruiting ability.

I mean the dude was recruiting at freaking Boise State University. How many kids want to live in Idaho? He had to pick from talent that was viewed as not good enough to be in the PAC-12 and he still won with it. I think that speaks to his ability to find gems that are overlooked by the bigger programs.

Take his scouting abilities, give him a school with all of the advantages of UW and I think he will excel getting UW the talent it needs to win.

I mean just look at this:

Boise State's recruiting classes are never ranked highly but they have had more players drafted than UW, UCLA, Oregon State, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado. Only PAC-12 teams with more players sent to the NFL draft than Boise State since 2010 are Cal, Oregon, Stanford and USC. So it was obvious that Chris Petersen was bringing NFL caliber talent to Boise State, and he was finding guys who were not highly rated by most mainstream high school scouting agencies.

No offense, but what that tells us is he knows how to teach up the kids he does get and no one denies that.

He will now be fishing in a much bigger pond. Boise was largely left to take what the big guys didn't, plus those kids who wanted a smaller school for whatever reason, plus those kids who weren't going to academically qualify for the bigger schools. How many big recruits (4 star plus) did they ever take in their classes?

Now he will have all of those things you cite, but so does the other 11 Pac schools plus those majors from across the country that try to poach out of our region. Does he have enough to attract those big name kids? It is easy to say he should based on past performance, but we have seen other coaches fail at this when going to the majors from the mids.

I'm not going to say I expect him to fail at all. All I'm saying is it has to be an unknown until we see it. It has to be.

All signs are he will do well with that, but it will depend on the quality of his coaches and his persuasiveness compared to the rest of the Pac's HC's.