Who's Better? Washington, Colorado, or USC

[Shanemansj13]

The Big only has 2 teams in the top 50 in TO, the PAC has 6

Offensive efficiency is a better stat. B1G has 4 in the top 50 and 9 in the top 60.

The B1G has 3 teams in the top 4 in defensive effiiency, Penn St is not one of those teams. Ohio St has played the other 2 teams though. They also have 9 teams in the top 50 of defensive efficiency.

 

[Shanemansj13]

You cant play in the CCG if you're not the best team in your division. You should read that fox article that was just posted

UW is the best team in the PAC. They dont have 3 losses

 

[Shanemansj13]

You know your conference is bad when you are rated 4th out of P5 conferences and the AAC is in front of the Big 12 LOL for the 5th spot.

PAC! PAC! PAC!

 

[TheRobotDevil]

UW is the best team in the PAC. They dont have 3 losses

USC has the better resume.And by your standards football games are decided by resumes

 

[Shanemansj13]

USC has the better resume.And by your standards football games are decided by resumes

Nice but wins and losses are part of the resume so you must be confused

 

[TheDayMan]

What are you two even arguing about anymore? You're making me get all confused about who's on the shit list.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Nice but wins and losses are part of the resume so you must be confused

 

[TheRobotDevil]

What are you two even arguing about anymore? You're making me get all confused about who's on the shit list.

I think we came to an agreement that OSU gets in and opens with Alabama. While the Huskies play Clemson in the first round in the play offs

 

[seafandoghawk]

PAC 12 sucks...sorry.

You guys aren't even the best team in a bad conference.

Or think about it this way. Right now, the CFP Top 25 includes:

Big 1 = 4 teams (2, 5, 6, 7)
PAC 12 = 5 teams (4, 8, 11, 18, 20)
SEC = 5 teams (1, 14, 15, 21, 22)
ACC = 5 teams (3, 12, 13, 23, 25)
Big 12 = 3 teams (9, 10, 16)

So if the PAC 12 sucks as you say, then according to the CFP committee, the SEC seems to suck even worse, as well as the ACC, and the BIG 12. And even the one conference that doesn't suck, the BIG 1, only put four teams in the Top 25 (less than the PAC 12, SEC, and ACC).

 

[seafandoghawk]

Your substantive rebuttal is test Utah and Wazzu are quality wins. Think about the fact that you're playing Colorado for the conference championship.

That's like Vandy winning the east in the SEC.

That's what I thought. You're basing your opinion on past seasons rather than this season. And you're right in a sense-- because Washington, Colorado, and Washington State were all mid-level to poor teams in past seasons (although Utah has been pretty good for a few seasons now) So kudos for that.

But in this season, none of them are mid-level to poor teams. It's a different year.

 

[HuskerOC]

1. Washington (12-1)
2. USC (9-3) (Beat #3)
3. Colorado (10-3)

 

[trojanfan12]

Well according to Clark's theory, USC beat UW so they are better

Washington is the answer.

Well, considering USC dominated the Huskies in their house, I'd say he has a good case.

 

[Shanemansj13]

What are you two even arguing about anymore? You're making me get all confused about who's on the shit list.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Well, considering USC dominated the Huskies in their house, I'd say he has a good case.

And I agree but entire resumes dont suggest the same. If only USC would have played Darnold sooner who knows. He is only a freshman though, y'all have time

 

[Shanemansj13]

I think we came to an agreement that OSU gets in and opens with Alabama. While the Huskies play Clemson in the first round in the play offs

 

[trojanfan12]

There is more than 1 team that could beat USC right now. Other than Bama, I think Clemson, Ohio State, L'Ville, Stanford and maybe even Wisconsin would beat the Trojans. SC is playing good ball right now, but during their 8 game winning streak, 6 of those teams have losing records.

I've been a little skeptical of USC's run because of the bold. However, I will say this in USC's defense. They beat both teams who are playing in the PAC-12 and currently ranked #4 and #8 in the country. The game vs. Washington was also at Washington which boasts arguably the loudest, most hostile stadium in the PAC.

As for the 6 teams that had losing records. It's not like any of those games have been close. USC has beaten those teams the way you'd expect a top team to beat teams like that.

 

[TheDayMan]

Well, considering USC dominated the Huskies in their house, I'd say he has a good case.

Dude, that's in the past. It's time for all of us to move on.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Check out the best teams in the PAC 12 and then check out the best teams in the SEC. Tell me how many good teams are in the SEC vs how many good teams are in the PAC 12.

The SEC was 2-0 against the PAC this year correct?

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Whose better?


THEE entire Pac12 North…top to bottom, next year.

 

[trojanfan12]

And I agree but entire resumes dont suggest the same. If only USC would have played Darnold sooner who knows. He is only a freshman though, y'all have time

Overall resume determines what "rewards" a team gets at the end of the season. It doesn't determine who is the better team right now. Because Washington and Colorado have better resume's, they get to play in the PAC-12 CCG and Washington has a shot at the playoff.

However, head to head vs. both teams and the way USC has played over the past 8 games, suggests they are the better team.

As for Darnold, if he played, maybe we look a little better than we did against Bama (but that's a heckuva spot to start a kid who hadn't played one down of college ball yet), but I think we still would have gotten beat pretty bad. That team had too much new stuff to deal with and wasn't ready for a team like Bama.

Where he may have made the difference though, would be maybe Stanford and I think we probably beat Utah if it wasn't his first start.