THE PAC12 THREAD v.4

[wazzu31]

I don't get the love for Stanford this year. They will open AT BEST 2-2 in conference and possibly worse. They have a legit schedule, only 10 returning starters (5 offense, 5 defense) AND breaking in a new QB?

With the much easier schedule, there is at least a punchers chance WSU finishes above the trees as well and could pass the ducks if they aren't all in a row.

It's not a love fest, Stanford has just turned into that program that won't plummet the basically every other Pac school has when they lost their QB. They replace Luck with Hogan and Hogan wasn't anywhere near the most talented QB in the conference any of his 4 years.

 

[socaljim242]

I got it now! Its better to lose with a QB you have recruited and developed than win with a rentaback? Is that really what your argument is? Seems to weaken your argument when the transfer could have picked Alabama, making your argument re QBs quite moot. A transfer is legal, you will be using at least one, but its not OK if that transfer is a QB, but you want us to accept that argument on its face just because it fits your position. It could be too in one's wildest imagination, that a team, especially a team like USC with QBs lined up one behind another, a team needs a defensive lineman more than a QB. Whose argument sucks?

Oregon has another grad transfer on their O line but as you see I never even brought it up because like USCs guy on the D line his impact would be minimal with situational substitutions compared to the impact of a starting QB. If you can't get that then you don't have enough knowledge of football to have a conversation with.
So to answer your question. Yours still sucks and is ill informed.

 

[socaljim242]

Yes, because a team doesn't play every team in the other division which may allow one team a big advantage as avoiding Oregon helped ASU win the South. Twice. No, don't say that they could have won even if they had played Oregon or lost if they did, because you don't know and never will. That's why it is artificial because the winner is not necessarily decided on the field.

Great argument. Alabama didn't play every other college team in the country so they are artificial champions not real ones. I will make sure to tell the gumps. I'm amazed you even follow all of this artificialness.

 

[socaljim242]

I got it now! Its better to lose with a QB you have recruited and developed than win with a rentaback? Is that really what your argument is? Seems to weaken your argument when the transfer could have picked Alabama, making your argument re QBs quite moot. A transfer is legal, you will be using at least one, but its not OK if that transfer is a QB, but you want us to accept that argument on its face just because it fits your position. It could be too in one's wildest imagination, that a team, especially a team like USC with QBs lined up one behind another, a team needs a defensive lineman more than a QB. Whose argument sucks?

Unlike you apparently, I follow a "college" football team. So while I know some players transfer schools and all schools have one or two I would hope the school I follow has the student athletes that they recruited and developed be the main reason they win games or lose games. I doubt Adams saw much of the inside of a classroom once he was allowed in to Oregon. And I really doubt he had real asperations of a Grad degree. But being the starting QB he was the main part of Oregons offense. To me it just doesn't feel right. So yeah i'd rather USC lose than not play QBs that were recruited and developed by them then bring in a one year QB whos been somewhere else his entire career. It's not all about just winning.

 

[Not Neutral]

Oregon has another grad transfer on their O line but as you see I never even brought it up because like USCs guy on the D line his impact would be minimal with situational substitutions compared to the impact of a starting QB. If you can't get that then you don't have enough knowledge of football to have a conversation with.
So to answer your question. Yours still sucks and is ill informed.

Well, see, you're just trying to keep us in the dark as to the whole argument so you can modify as you go along. I believe UW accepted a fifth year transfer lineman this year too. So then USC, UW and Oregon have transfers on their lines. I get that fine, but its your self-serving conclusions that suck. Now you've slipped in "compared to the impact of a starting QB" no where mentioned before. How do you know that we talking about a "starting" QB.

 

[socaljim242]

Well, see, you're just trying to keep us in the dark as to the whole argument so you can modify as you go along. I believe UW accepted a fifth year transfer lineman this year too. So then USC, UW and Oregon have transfers on their lines. I get that fine, but its your self-serving conclusions that suck. Now you've slipped in "compared to the impact of a starting QB" no where mentioned before. How do you know that we talking about a "starting" QB.

Oh I don't know . Maybe because I was one of the people arguing about with OLy about this for quite a while now. I'm pretty sure I know what the origonal argument is about. The fact that these linemen were never mentioned is because they will have minmal impact on a game. Nothing like what two QB transfers will do for a programs ability to win games. Why don't you skip back some and read so you know what the argument is.

 

[Vitamike]

Oh I don't know Mike. Last time I checked haveing a QB was kinda important for a football team. Not having one is kinda not a good thing and very bad planning. USC would still have a D line if Steve didnt come.

Well then Jim, it seems like you've answered your own question to the Oregon Ducks dilemma.

If it's kinda important to the team, as you put it, than when all the efforts at feeding the position pipeline are bare, compared to the teams expectations or standards, a renta-whatever is the most prudent path.

Wouldn't you agree?

Again, so I don't see the issue.

But let's address your comments as what's 'kinda important for a football team'.

Sure the QB is one of the more important spots, but its them glaring holes (Much like the USC Defensive Line this year) that can make or break a season too.

Don't believe me, ask any Arizona football fan how important that QB spot seems compared to the Center position last year.

Oh, and you know, last time I checked, having a great 'team', when playing football, is kind of important too, when you're on the National stage.

Bottom line, only Oregon and Stanford have been on the National stage of late in the PAC, by the end of the season, and while USC might have been satisfied with the type of QB play they've had of recent at the helm. SC hasn't been on the same stage as either of those two teams in some time, the same goes for every South team who has been merely competing for Division Championships since the PAC has move to a 12 team Conference.

 

[TheDayMan]

Yes, because a team doesn't play every team in the other division which may allow one team a big advantage as avoiding Oregon helped ASU win the South. Twice. No, don't say that they could have won even if they had played Oregon or lost if they did, because you don't know and never will. That's why it is artificial because the winner is not necessarily decided on the field.

It's how it works... almost every (soon to every) major conference uses that format, almost every sports league at every level uses a similar format. It's not like they were screwed out of anything. There's nothing artificial about it..

 

[socaljim242]

Well then Jim, it seems like you've answered your own question to the Oregon Ducks dilemma.

If it's kinda important to the team, as you put it, than when all the efforts at feeding the position pipeline are bare, compared to the teams expectations or standards, a renta-whatever is the most prudent path.

Wouldn't you agree?

Again, so I don't see the issue.

But let's address your comments as what's 'kinda important for a football team'.

Sure the QB is one of the more important spots, but its them glaring holes (Much like the USC Defensive Line this year) that can make or break a season too.

Don't believe me, ask any Arizona football fan how important that QB spot seems compared to the Center position last year.

Oh, and you know, last time I checked, having a great 'team', when playing football, is kind of important too, when you're on the National stage.

Bottom line, only Oregon and Stanford have been on the National stage of late, and while USC might have been satisfied with the type of QB play they've had of recent at the helm. SC hasn't been on the same stage as either of those two teams in some time, the same goes for every South team who has been merely competing for Division Championships since the PAC has move to a 12 team Conference.

If you have a bad d line one guy isn't going to make tht much of a difference. USC would have just moved another lineman over if they didnt get Steve. Who would have been Oregons QB if Adams didn't get to transfer? You're not being honest if you think having Steve play some (remember they get substituted often) is changing USCs season more or anywhere close than if Oregon was forced to play someone they had other than Adams.

 

[Not Neutral]

Great argument. Alabama didn't play every other college team in the country so they are artificial champions not real ones. I will make sure to tell the gumps. I'm amazed you even follow all of this artificialness.

You read and understand well.

 

[Montalban]

Go Trojans

 

[socaljim242]

You read and understand well.

You don't recognize sarcasim well. I can't think of any leauge were every ( and I mean every) team plays every other team in that leauge the same amount of times or in some cases at all such as the NFL and college (every sport)

 

[Olyduck]

All that yet you still say nothing wrong .If you were selling a car, your pitch would be yeah, the transmission is shot and the engine has a blown head gasket but it's a good car.

If QBs are car parts they are all the same car part. the original part left. the next part wasnt as good as we hoped. we lost 4 more of the same part. one part was broken. so instead we went and got a part at a neighboring store. it worked pretty well.

 

[Not Neutral]

It's how it works... almost every (soon to every) major conference uses that format, almost every sports

You don't recognize sarcasim well. I can't think of any leauge were every ( and I mean every) team plays every other team in that leauge the same amount of times or in some cases at all such as the NFL and college (every sport)

I agree with that. The expansion for the cash has made CFB what it is today.

 

[socaljim242]

I think Oly and Not Neutral are smoking the same thing.

 

[Not Neutral]

It's how it works... almost every (soon to every) major conference uses that format, almost every sports league at every level uses a similar format. It's not like they were screwed out of anything. There's nothing artificial about it..

No one said anything about anyone getting screwed, it was all agreed in advance how it would done. I'm happy with that. But with the most of the power in the North this year, it may happen that the conference's fourth place team plays in the CCG. We'll see. Something to look forward to.

 

[Not Neutral]

I think Oly and Not Neutral are smoking the same thing.

Well, you better look for something new too. Whatever you're puffing is obviously not helping your thinking much either.

 

[Vitamike]

If you have a bad d line one guy isn't going to make tht much of a difference. USC would have just moved another lineman over if they didnt get Steve. Who would have been Oregons QB if Adams didn't get to transfer? You're not being honest if you think having Steve play some (remember they get substituted often) is changing USCs season more or anywhere close than if Oregon was forced to play someone they had other than Adams.

Could you be missing the point?

Let's look at it this way, in Lane's last year at USC there was a horrible battle for the QB spot. (I remember that Hawaii game where they went back and forth to no avail)

It honestly looked bad for a while there that year until Coach O took over and named Cody the starter. Had neither stepped up AND (And that is a huge addition to this scenario) USC was and had been on the National Stage, I wouldn't of had a problem if USC went RentaQB for the next season or two if need be.

Because the expectations were not at a National level, USC was not in real need of top tier Collegiate QB play, so they were afforded to let their pipeline flourish, and it did.

BTW - Who is your QB next season....

Browne or Darnold?

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Fear the Beaver...

 

[TheDayMan]

No one said anything about anyone getting screwed, it was all agreed in advance how it would done. I'm happy with that. But with the most of the power in the North this year, it may happen that the conference's fourth place team plays in the CCG. We'll see. Something to look forward to.

Yes, there's nothing artificial about it.