Is Pac-20 football too dominant?

[tlongII]

After watching the Pac-10 dominate all other conferences do you think it's bad for college football? Please discuss...

[DMX7]

I don't know... considering the Pac-10 is tied for last in BCS National Championships...

[elbamba]

Didn't Oregon just lose to a WAC team?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Never heard of the pac-20 mr shlong

[johngateswhiteley]

to be fair...the Pac-10 is underrated, but they aren't the best conference. USC should have another title or 2, which would help their cause, but like i touched on earlier their extra conference game can really hurt the perception.

[J.T.]

to be fair...the Pac-10 is underrated, but they aren't the best conference. USC should have another title or 2, which would help their cause, but like i touched on earlier their extra conference game can really hurt the perception.

lol still bitter about 41-38

[johngateswhiteley]

lol still bitter about 41-38

even aside from that.

[J.T.]

even aside from that.

so you think they should've played florida last year instead of penn state. cool.

[J.T.]

life must be easy for SC fan. plays in bad conference, gets overrated rankings by media, free trip to rose bowl every year. yeah.

[johngateswhiteley]

life must be easy for SC fan. plays in bad conference, gets overrated rankings by media, free trip to rose bowl every year. yeah.

1) they play in a tough conference

2) aren't overrated

3) get the best players

...yeah, its easy right now, but things can change.

[DMX7]

life must be easy for SC fan. plays in bad conference, gets overrated rankings by media, free trip to rose bowl every year. yeah.

They do play in a bad conference and they do get a free trip to the rose bowl but they're not overrated. They get the best players (like Texas & Florida) in their region which is a good region.

[J.T.]

"overrated media rankings"

reading is fundamental

i know their players are good but you look better when you play in a bad conference like SC does. SC is always ranked top 5 to start every year and they shouldn't be.

[dirk4mvp]

pac 10 is pretty average.

[johngateswhiteley]

"overrated media rankings"

reading is fundamental

i know their players are good but you look better when you play in a bad conference like SC does. SC is always ranked top 5 to start every year and they shouldn't be.

holy fuck. there hasn't been a year in the past 7 where USC wasn't easily a top 5 team. out of conference wins prove it by themselves.

you're fucking nuts...and seemingly a hater.

[DMX7]

"overrated media rankings"

reading is fundamental

i know their players are good but you look better when you play in a bad conference like SC does. SC is always ranked top 5 to start every year and they shouldn't be.

Are you really trying to distinguish "overrated" from "overrated media rankings" because that's exactly what I meant?

Either way, you're still wrong. They're ranking is not overrated by the media. They are a top 5 team ever year. Sorry... you lose.

[J.T.]

Either way, you're still wrong. They're ranking is not overrated by the media. They are a top 5 team ever year. Sorry... you lose.

Not this year. They would get chode bloaded by a lot of teams in the top 10. Got lucky against Buckeye.

[J.T.]

pac 10 is pretty average.

this

[Girasuck]

So far I would say the Pac-10 is better this year than they were last year. Lets see how they handle this week though. Some interesting games for the Pac-10 this week.

[johngateswhiteley]

After watching the Pac-10 dominate all other conferences do you think it's bad for college football? Please discuss...

while i don't go as far you as you, it is incredible how little respect the pac 10 conference gets. its not the best, but its very good, it appears. course, naysayers will point out the oregon game...whatever.

guess 5-0 in bowl games doesn't matter.

[johngateswhiteley]

tlong, once people have made up their mind...they are very resistant to change.

[redraiderinfiji]

tlong, once people have made up their mind...they are very resistant to change.

This quote explains jgw perfectly.......but he tends to change school loyalty like he changes porno dvds....whatever is good at the time

[j-6]

Pac-10 is above average, but no more than that. If someone else could wrestle the title away from SC every 3-4 years (I hate saying it, but they need a Texas to their OU) they'd be considered elite. I really think it's that simple. UCLA may be able to do that sometime soon, but until they start getting multiple teams in the top 15 consistent - which will be tough, considering they all play each other ever year - nobody short of their own fan bases will take them seriously east of the Rockies.

I think a lot of people see not having a conference championship game a weakness. I sit the fence on that one. While it gives the collective members a chance to have geographic champs play each other - usually with somewhat gaudy records - look at these preseason and early season darlings that get talked up with one of the reasons being they don't have to face a certain league opponent that year. The Pac-10 doesn't have that luxury.

We can play that inferior talent / shitty conference card all we want, but the fact is that SC has played all other nine schools in their league every year and been dominant. You get a rematch every season and they still win 90% of the time. Factor in that Notre Dame is a constant in their three game OOC window and now they're playing Ohio State as well. One cupcake, two biggies, and nine league games. We get bored with SC's dominance but if Texas had to play Nebraska and Colorado every year, we lose at least one in eight, more like 2-3. That's mid-level and not even accounting for upstarts like KU and Mizzou.

[johngateswhiteley]

Pac-10 is above average, but no more than that. If someone else could wrestle the title away from SC every 3-4 years (I hate saying it, but they need a Texas to their OU) they'd be considered elite. I really think it's that simple. UCLA may be able to do that sometime soon, but until they start getting multiple teams in the top 15 consistent - which will be tough, considering they all play each other ever year - nobody short of their own fan bases will take them seriously east of the Rockies.

I think a lot of people see not having a conference championship game a weakness. I sit the fence on that one. While it gives the collective members a chance to have geographic champs play each other - usually with somewhat gaudy records - look at these preseason and early season darlings that get talked up with one of the reasons being they don't have to face a certain league opponent that year. The Pac-10 doesn't have that luxury.

We can play that inferior talent / shitty conference card all we want, but the fact is that SC has played all other nine schools in their league every year and been dominant. You get a rematch every season and they still win 90% of the time. Factor in that Notre Dame is a constant in their three game OOC window and now they're playing Ohio State as well. One cupcake, two biggies, and nine league games. We get bored with SC's dominance but if Texas had to play Nebraska and Colorado every year, we lose at least one in eight, more like 2-3. That's mid-level and not even accounting for upstarts like KU and Mizzou.


the Pac-10 has to be above average considering the other conferences out there...right? i think they are good. that being said...

you're right on with the rest of this post. i posted an article about this very same thing a little while back, and of course, it got no attention. the pac 10 consistently plays tough OOC schedules and you hit the nail on the head...theres a reason a pac 10 team comes up and bites USC almost each year.

so here's the question j-6...whats more difficult, the USC schedule? or the system of their schedule?

[rjv]

sec is the best conference. big 12 and pac 10 are pretty much a toss up for second.

[tlongII]

The Conference of Champions

[tlongII]

Definitely the best conference for college football.

[tlongII]

East coast bias.

[leemajors]

greatness

[j-6]

the Pac-10 has to be above average considering the other conferences out there...right? i think they are good. that being said...

you're right on with the rest of this post. i posted an article about this very same thing a little while back, and of course, it got no attention. the pac 10 consistently plays tough OOC schedules and you hit the nail on the head...theres a reason a pac 10 team comes up and bites USC almost each year.

so here's the question j-6...whats more difficult, the USC schedule? or the system of their schedule?


There's way too much to consider to break it down that easily. The Pac-10's superior academics made UT knock on its door fifteen years ago so keep in mind this isn't all about football. What I gather is that the conference likes being how it is - sort of like the Big Ten - and isn't going to bow down to doing things the way everyone else does. Which in turn screws its member schools to a degree and the entire NCAA a little further. Since they have to play each other so often, and there's a finite amount of games the NCAA allows a team to play, they're on a island of sorts. Add in that they are 2-3 hours behind the majority of the country and basically SC gets two revolving games a season (Notre Dame is as regular of an opponent as UCLA.). Why the hell would they want to go play Ohio State and some random SEC team for something as fleeting as national respect when they have nine straight conference games that mean something? Just the fact that they played the Bucks says quite a bit.

In the old days, the winner of the Pac-10 went to the Rose Bowl. It was pretty simple - win a conference title and play the Big 10 winner. Now with all this poll and computer business and an actual BCS title game, public perception is that the Pac-10 isn't a heavyweight even though you can legitimately argue that in football they demand more from each member than any other league in the country. Conference title games make for great TV and a definitive champion, but as a Longhorn I saw firsthand what happens when it's not decided on the field and a tiebreak is involved. The old Pac-10/ Big 10 had a very reasonable system in place - the team that's waited the longest to play in Pasadena wins the berth.

I've read the whole scenario about inviting Utah and Colorado, putting Notre Dame in the Big 10, and letting TCU into the Big 12. I don't know if that's the answer when we aren't getting a playoff in the near future. It is what it is for now.

[benefactor]

:lmao

[Cant_Be_Faded]

the pac-20 is so dominant

tlong just injected a shot of black heroin into his junk to overcome this shellacking