|
|
|
|
#1
11-11-2005, 09:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting article on Pac-10
From Ted Miller in the Seattle PI
PI article 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 
|
|
#2
11-11-2005, 10:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
very interesting....
Question bernie, am I still allowed to think Oregon is ridiculously overrated?
|
|
#3
11-12-2005, 07:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
[ 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
|
|
#4
11-12-2005, 01:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
OSU is ranked 10th because their losses have come to top 5 teams in classic games.
|
|
#5
11-12-2005, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
[ 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
|
|
#6
11-13-2005, 01:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
[ 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.
|
|
#7
11-12-2005, 02:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
the answer Bernie is that Oregon plays an easy schedule.
|
|
#8
11-12-2005, 06:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
[ 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
|
|
#10
11-12-2005, 07:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting article on Pac-10
[ 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.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
