Interesting article on Pac-10

[bernie]

From Ted Miller in the Seattle PI
PI article (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/cfootball/247793_millerpac10.html)

To USC's Carroll, best D is great O

By TED MILLER
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

USC coach Pete Carroll doesn't come off as a terribly philosophical guy, but he's been thinking about the old chicken-and-egg argument a little bit lately, at least as it pertains to college football.

To defenses, in particular.

While Carroll acts like he's completely insulated in a world of one-game-at-a-time, he's aware of the scuttlebutt that says his top-ranked Trojans are vulnerable on defense. Some pundits have even asserted that the crew Carroll personally oversees is, well, not good.

Or perhaps just mediocre. The Trojans rank 41st in the nation in total defense and 31st in scoring defense.

Meanwhile, the nation's other two unbeatens, No. 2 Texas and No. 4 Alabama, own defenses ranked in the top seven in yards and points surrendered.

The conventional -- read: East Coast -- wisdom is the Pac-10 is weak on defense, while SEC fans quickly note that their conference boasts seven of the nation's top 26 defenses.

Carroll can't resist a brief observation: Six Pac-10 teams rank in the nation's top 20 in scoring. Only one SEC team and two Big 12 teams rank in the top 25.

"It's ridiculous that the (Pac-10) offenses are that good," Carroll said. "It isn't about the defenses. It's the offenses that are so proficient."

In other words, USC's defense looks vulnerable because it plays in the Pac-10, and Alabama's and Texas' defenses look dominant because they don't.



So is it the chicken (powerful SEC defenses) or the egg (potent Pac-10 offenses)?

If USC gives up 20.6 points and 348 yards per game, does that mean it's bad on defense? Might the Trojans have better numbers if they played Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Baylor, Tennessee, Kentucky, South Carolina, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska or Mississippi State -- offenses ranked between 92nd and 112th in the nation, a nether region uninhabited by the Pac-10?

It's worthwhile to note that LSU gave up 560 yards and 31 points to Arizona State but dominated its other seven, non-Pac-10 opponents to the tune of 258 yards and 11.4 points per game.

USC pounded out 631 yards against Arizona State in its 38-28 win, nearly 200 yards more than LSU produced, and held the Sun Devils to 415 yards.

USC and Alabama do have a common opponent. The Trojans nipped Arkansas 70-17 on Sept. 17. A week later, Alabama's defense dominated the Razorbacks in a 24-13 victory.

Alabama has a great defense, sure. And USC would score 35 points against the Crimson Tide because the Trojans' offense is more talented than the first-team All-SEC offense that will be shortly unveiled. Seriously -- go look up all the SEC's offensive "stars."

Yet here's my real gripe with the Tide faithful using the defense debate as a launching pad to grouse about how winning the SEC should provide automatic entry into the national title game: wimpy non-conference scheduling.

From 2000-03, Alabama upgraded its non-conference schedule. First it played a home-and-home with UCLA and went 0-2. Then it played a home-and-home with Oklahoma and went 0-2.

Yes, this is déjà vu. Remember Auburn griping about being left out of the BCS last year?

In 2002 and 2003, Auburn upgraded its non-conference schedule. It played a home-and-home with USC and went 0-2. Auburn also played a home-and-home with Georgia Tech in 2003 and 2005. Yep, 0-2.

Here are the Tide and Tigers' non-conference opponents during their undefeated seasons: Louisiana-Monroe, The Citadel, Louisiana Tech, Middle Tennessee State, Southern Miss and Utah State.

In other words, they both discovered the best defense was an offensive non-conference schedule.

-----
b

[ThaSaltCracka]

very interesting....

Question bernie, am I still allowed to think Oregon is ridiculously overrated?

[Vince Young]

[ QUOTE ]
The conventional -- read: East Coast -- wisdom is the Pac-10 is weak on defense, while SEC fans quickly note that their conference boasts seven of the nation's top 26 defenses.

Carroll can't resist a brief observation: Six Pac-10 teams rank in the nation's top 20 in scoring. Only one SEC team and two Big 12 teams rank in the top 25.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL

[PhatTBoll]

I agree wholeheartedly with bashing Auburn and Bama's nonconference schedules. It's a disgrace.

But one answer to the overarching question is to look at the PAC-10 nonconference games. So let's do that:

Arizona 24, Utah 27
Arizona 31, N. Arizona 12
Arizona 24, Purdue 31

ASU 63, Temple 16
ASU 31, LSU 35
ASU 52, Northwestern 21

Cal 41, Sacramento St. 3
Cal 35, Illinois 20
Cal 41, New Mexico St. 13

Oregon 38, Houston 24
Oregon 47, Montana 14
Oregon 37, Fresno St. 34

Oregon St. 41, Portland St. 14
Oregon St. 30, Boise St. 27
Oregon St. 27, Louisville 63

Stanford 41, Navy 38
Stanford 17, UC Davis 20 /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

UCLA 44, S.D. St. 21
UCLA 63, Rice 21
UCLA 41, Oklahoma 24

USC 63, Hawaii 17
USC 70, Arkansas 17
USC 34, Notre Dame 31

Washington 17, Air Force 20
Washington 34, Idaho 6
Washington 17, Notre Dame 36

Wash. St. 38, Idaho 26
Wash. St. 55, Nevada 21
Wash. St. 48, Grambling 7

Some questionable games in there, for sure. A problem with these Pac 10 teams is that a lot of games end up in blowouts, so there's a lot of garbage time.
But still, these defensive performances stick out:

Arizona giving up 31 to Purdue in a loss

Cal giving up 20 to Illinois

Oregon's secondary looking like garbage against Houston
Oregon giving up 34 to good-but-not-awesome Fresno St.

Oregon St. getting bitch-slapped by hugely overrated Louisville

Stanford vomiting all over themselves against Navy and UC Davis

UCLA giving up 21 points each to the Aztecs and the Owls (though neither game was close), and 24 to an Oklahoma team that had just scored 10 against TCU at home.

Washington losing to Air Force, who is 3-7 this year.

WSU giving up 26 to Idaho, and 21 to Nevada.

Having watched all or part of a good portion of these games, it's hard for me to say that the Pac-10 plays anything but bad defense. It's certainly not in the league of the SEC, and I think the Big 12 is better.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
very interesting....

Question bernie, am I still allowed to think Oregon is ridiculously overrated?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think they should be ranked higher actually. How is Ohio St. ranked higher? Much less Miami? But that's ok, they'll end up getting screwed if they win their last 2. Get a holiday bowl bid and destroying whoever they face in that one.

b

[pokerdirty]

OSU is ranked 10th because their losses have come to top 5 teams in classic games.

[ThaSaltCracka]

the answer Bernie is that Oregon plays an easy schedule.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
the answer Bernie is that Oregon plays an easy schedule.

[/ QUOTE ]

Compared to who? They've played 4 top 25 teams and only lost to the #1 team.

Not to mention, if ND gets a BCS bid, it will once again show how much the BCS is a joke.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
OSU is ranked 10th because their losses have come to top 5 teams in classic games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oregon only has 1 loss and that's to the #1 team. Ohio St. also only played 2 teams in the top 25.

b

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention, if ND gets a BCS bid, it will once again show how much the BCS is a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]
Get ready to laugh then.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the answer Bernie is that Oregon plays an easy schedule.

[/ QUOTE ]

Compared to who? They've played 4 top 25 teams and only lost to the #1 team.

Not to mention, if ND gets a BCS bid, it will once again show how much the BCS is a joke.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

No it won't. The whole point of the BCS is to match the top 2 teams in the nation. It's not to fill out the big 4 bowls with the "top 8" teams in the nation. All the other stuff they add in is just filler, to pacify the bowls.

The BCS specifically states that if a team is in the top 12 of the BCS standings and has at least 9 wins, they are eligible to be chosen as an at-large team. This is basically so ND has a way in; and since ND is the biggest draw in the nation, it's smart to figure out a way to get them involved. The bowls are about making money, and any bowl that has the opportunity to select the biggest draw in the nation (ND) and doesn't is retarded.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention, if ND gets a BCS bid, it will once again show how much the BCS is a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]
Get ready to laugh then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, I know. They tend to ignore that ND got beat at home by an unranked team. Same with LSU. Same with Miami once Fla St drops off the top 25 this week. Though they'll easily win the ACC for the BCS bid as the ACC championship game will be a joke.

At least 'bama lost. The SEC looks like it might have an interesting championship game.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
The whole point of the BCS is to match the top 2 teams in the nation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and they've done a pretty poor job at that the last few years, haven't they?

[ QUOTE ]
The bowls are about making money,

[/ QUOTE ]

No sh*t. Which is why it will likely never go to a playoff system.

Meanwhile the current system is and has been proven bias and flawed because they don't put great matchups in the major bowls when they can which would also draw money.

One reason ND is so well known is because of the special compensation they receive that no other NCAA team gets. Which is a joke. Which is also a prime reason they aren't likely to join any conference.

It'll be nice to see them get another bowl bid they don't deserve and be handed another blowout like they got when they went against the Beavers. Essentially, wasting a BCS bowl while giving a lesser deserving team money in their school that they don't have to share with a conference. Nebraska got screwed that year.

People will tire of seeing BCS bowl mismatches.

b

[banditbdl]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
very interesting....

Question bernie, am I still allowed to think Oregon is ridiculously overrated?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think they should be ranked higher actually. How is Ohio St. ranked higher? Much less Miami? But that's ok, they'll end up getting screwed if they win their last 2. Get a holiday bowl bid and destroying whoever they face in that one.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Part of Oregon's lower ranking than Miami and Ohio St. might be some East Coast bias or whatever. I haven't seem much of Oregon live and this is where the bias might come in, but if you look at the box scores it doesn't help Oregon. They're 1-1 against teams that are in the Top 25 right now with the win being against Fresno St. at home by 3, and the loss being a dismantling at home. Then the last 3 weeks they've been squeking out wins while Ohio St. and Miami have been destroying teams.

Bottom line Oregon got destroyed when it was overmatched and hasn't been burying mediocre oppositon, while Ohio St. and Miami both competed in their losses (all to pretty dang good teams) and have barely been threatened since.

And Oregon is obviously a good football team and some of their Pac-10 games might not have been as close as the box score looks. But they are what they are.

[Dudd]

[ QUOTE ]
It'll be nice to see them get another bowl bid they don't deserve and be handed another blowout like they got when they went against the Beavers.

[/ QUOTE ]

We've played 9 games, lost two games by a combined 6 points, beat Michigan at Michigan by a touchdown, and have won in blowouts in the other 6 games. There is zero basis for thinking that we'll get blown out in a BCS game unless you're horribly biased against ND, which it appears you are. Point to Michigan State, and yes we should have won, but at the time they weren't tanking, and their offense matched up perfectly against our terrible pass defense. Even so, they only won in OT after having a 21 pt lead in the second half, and that's the only game that we've had a large deficit in all year.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The whole point of the BCS is to match the top 2 teams in the nation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and they've done a pretty poor job at that the last few years, haven't they?

[/ QUOTE ]

They have, but that's not your argument.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The bowls are about making money,

[/ QUOTE ]

No sh*t. Which is why it will likely never go to a playoff system.

Meanwhile the current system is and has been proven bias and flawed because they don't put great matchups in the major bowls when they can which would also draw money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. The whole idea of allowing two at-large bids which the bowls themselves get to pick is to let the bowls choose the teams that will make them the most money. Let's say Oregon finishes 8th in the BCS standings and ND finishes 10th. Which game is going to make more money for the Orange Bowl - Miami/Oregon or Miami/ND? Which one will get the higher ratings? It's not even close.

[ QUOTE ]
One reason ND is so well known is because of the special compensation they receive that no other NCAA team gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you've got it backwards. They are well-known because of their tradition. This tradition and fan-support is what allows them to have their own TV contract. There is no other school in the country that has such a wide-reaching fan base, or the popularity to allow them to have their own TV contract.

[ QUOTE ]
Which is a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

It makes money for the NCAA, which is what they care about

[ QUOTE ]
Which is also a prime reason they aren't likely to join any conference.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, ND makes more money on its own so that's why they'll stay that way.

[ QUOTE ]


It'll be nice to see them get another bowl bid they don't deserve and be handed another blowout like they got when they went against the Beavers. Essentially, wasting a BCS bowl while giving a lesser deserving team money in their school that they don't have to share with a conference.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, you're still throwing in the "deserving school" argument which you claim isn't your stance.

[ QUOTE ]

People will tire of seeing BCS bowl mismatches.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, which is why the Big East needs to get better - no one wanted to see Pitt last year, or WVU or South Florida this year.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OSU is ranked 10th because their losses have come to top 5 teams in classic games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oregon only has 1 loss and that's to the #1 team. Ohio St. also only played 2 teams in the top 25.

[/ QUOTE ]


Ohio State would be a 2 TD favorite over the Ducks, thats why.

[TheHip41]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the answer Bernie is that Oregon plays an easy schedule.

[/ QUOTE ]

Compared to who? They've played 4 top 25 teams and only lost to the #1 team.

Not to mention, if ND gets a BCS bid, it will once again show how much the BCS is a joke.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Oregon is rated low, but seriously, who's going to win a game of Miami vs. Oregon. That's what the polls are about.

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, I know. They tend to ignore that ND got beat at home by an unranked team.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that as a Ducks fan you hate the BCS, and I can't blame you. But an ND team that:

1. Has won 5 in a row
2. Has a new, promising coach
3. Is 9-2
4. Is comfortably in the top 10 (and possibly top 5 by season's end) in the human polls
5. Has an explosive offense
6. Lost both its games on the final play and came this close to beating OMGUSC

Will always make the BCS. Always.