Week Six BlogPoll Roundtable

by David Piper on Oct 2, 2007 8:06 PM PDT in Oregon Ducks Football

My Opinion On Sports is hosting the roundtable this week:

The Battle for #1 - USC and LSU are separated by one vote in the AP poll. We made the switch in last week's blogpoll by putting the Tigers in our top spot. State your case for who should be the top team in the country.

I'm sticking with USC--for now. Its really 1 and 1a at this point, but, given that I don't know who I would pick in a game between the two, I'm rewarding SC for going out on the road. SC constantly schedules tough road games, where as LSU plays "road games" against Tulane in the SuperDome. Both have good wins, though SC has looked more vulnerable at times. If LSU beats Florida next week, I'll make the switch.

Oklahoma, Florida, West Virginia, Texas and Rutgers were all upset this weekend. Of those teams, who has the best shot of getting back into the national title hunt?

What, no love for my Ducks? The Big XII is a joke, so Texas and Oklahoma are out. And West Virginia and Rutgers don't really play anyone out of conference. Meanwhile, Florida potentially could have two wins over LSU if they run the table. That's more impressive than anyone else has the opportunity for, so I gotta go Florida.

Looking at the current AP Top 10, who is grossly overrated and who should be in there that isn't?

Overrated has to be Wisconsin. I know they are undefeated, but so are Purdue and Kansas. Wisconsin is a beneficiary of the "we had them highly ranked at the beginning of the season, so they stay" mentality. They have sleepwalked through the season, barely beating such stalwarts as UNLV and The Citadel. Meanwhile, they have played nobody of note.

And replacing Wisconsin in the top ten should be Oregon. I know I'm a homer, but I also know that if not for a fumble at the one foot line, Oregon is taking a completely gassed Cal defense to OT. Meanwhile, if Oregon played Wisconsin, it'd be Michigan all over again. Yes, the Big 10 is pathetic.

What is the worst coaching mistake you've seen this season?

That Mike Bellotti continues to employ Nick AllowAlotti as his DC has to be one of them. But I'll say Les Miles' decision to completely trash the Pac-10. That's looking awfully foolish right now, don't you think?

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I know it won't make me popular here

But I agree with Les. Yes, it's partly because I'm an SEC homer, but prior to this year the Pac-10 was pretty much just USC and everyone else (don't even try to sell me on the 2006 vintage of Cal). Now, both conferences have their superpowers (this year that'd be USC/Cal vs LSU/Florida), and both have their doormats (Stanford vs Vandy). But more importantly, the SEC also-rans are just plain tougher than the Pac-10's. You can make a good case for Oregon to be mid-top tier, along the lines of what we've seen from Spurrier's up and coming Scarolina team (no, not a mis-spelling). But who, then, matches up against Georgia, 'Bama, Auburn, Arkansas (uhhh, forget that one), or (dare I say it) Kentucky? Arizona State is streaky, and Ty's boys are starting to bring it together, but I'll believe it when I see it. Other than that, Pac-10 folks...?

Basically, for me, it boils down to two things:

The Pac-10 needs an effing championship game. I won't take any conference seriously that doesn't have one, Big10+1 included. I'm starting to come around on y'all's (haha, two apostrophes in one word, and it's not even Hindi) conference since really getting into the Ducks last year. And by damn, is it fun to see an offense that's free-wheeling, helmed by a coach who relishes every chance he can take to be ballsy (damn you, Phil Fulmer, be more like Bellotti!). But that's neither here nor there.
My lady and I literally waltzed onto the Autzen turf the first weekend of August and nobody stopped us. The Ducks were just starting training camp and we passed more than a few as they shuttled between buildings at the complex. We were able to take about 100 pictures, rolling around on the "grass" of the 50 yard line with nobody bothering us. From a fan's standpoint, that kind of access was super-freaking-cool. But honestly...can you imagine being able to do that at an SEC stadium (even Miss-State)? You'd be thrown in jail within milliseconds of stepping your right pinkie toe on the first blades of grass. In the Southern Autumn, Saturdays are for football, and each stadium is a hallowed cathedral. Take that as you will, but every other SEC fan I know stands gape-jawed when I tell my Autzen story. We simply can't believe that kind of thing was allowed.

Before you get too worked-up:
It saddens me to say my Vols (can I call them "sub-par also-rans"?) are absolutely pathetic this year. I'm certain many of you will point out the drubbing they received at the paws of the Golden Bears as evidence of some kind of Pac-10 supremecy. The Vols suck, but happened to hang a fair amount of points on those boys from NorCal.

Apropos of nothing:
I'm a little sad that I'll be missing the Cubbies at Wrigley this weekend as I make my yearly excursion to Neyland Stadium to watch Georgia re-take the series. You may or may not be proud to know that I'm at least a little heartened that the Ducks are on a bye so I won't have to miss their game, too. I'm still a little bitter about missing the Cal game last week, despite the outcome (damn you ESPN and the Milwaukee Brewers for moving up the start from 6pm to 2pm).

End of incoherent rambling. Go Ducks. Go Vols.

by SnoConeGod on Oct 3, 2007 7:08 AM PDT reply actions

Championship game

I absolutely disagree that we need in the Pac-10. To start off with, we know have a full round-robin schedule, so every team plays each other. Why do we need a championship game? Other conferences need one because the teams do NOT play everyone in their conference.

by ntrebon on Oct 3, 2007 7:14 AM PDT up reply actions

Alrightie

Honestly, this back-and-forth could go on forever, and none of us is really blazing any fresh ground with the discussion, here, but that won't stop any of us, now, will it?

(Really, that was just my excuse to use 6 commas in one overly-long sentence. And this is why I'm not a legitimate blogger. Well, that and the lack of a cogent, informed opinion. And a lack of writing skill...that's pretty detrimental, too.)

Full round-robin schedules are a great idea, and I'll agree with you that they do a great job of naturally determining who's the "best" in the conference.

However.

Assume you have three teams that each finish 11-1. For the sake of this year's argument, let's call them USC, Cal, and Oregon. Now, Oregon already got its loss to Cal. Let's assume USC beats Cal later this year and Oregon somehow discovers The Lord's Divine Kiss and beats USC.

That, my friends, is what conferences without championships call a clusterf**k of transitivity at the top. The winner comes down to a second-rate statistic and the other two are left holding their respective private parts in the wind.

On the flipside, look at what's great about a conference championship. True, not all teams play eachother, but here the sub-conference record reigns supreme. What's diluted by that fact is strengthened by the prospect of a "prove it" rematch (and excuse me for replying to ntrebon here when this was alluded to by jtlight later...don't worry, what I don't cover here will come there soon enough). It's not about "dodging" someone...it's about "proving it" against a team you may have gotten lucky with earlier in the season. Or it's about "proving it" against a team that's torn up your neighbors to the north/south/east/west (depending on alignment).

In the case of this year's SEC, let's assume that Florida upsets LSU by a fluke play late in the game on Saturday. Let's also assume that both teams then win-out to face eachother in the Championship game. Don't you think that grudge match between them would be as high-velocity as football can get?

Turn it the other way. Assume the Pac-10 expands to 12 schools and Oregon (representing the North) faces USC (representing the South) in a championship game. Anyone here willing to say they'd shrug off another shot at the "king" after a regular-season loss? C'mon, don't kid yourself. ;-)

And back to the "dodging" thing, I point to the Big-XII (ugh, thanks for that, by the way) and KSU's gigantic upset of Oklahoma in 2003. Or even LSU's (thanks again, dude) upset of My Vols in 2001 (and I was there for that debacle...we would've been in the nat'l-freaking-title game...many roses were in attendance *). All a championship does is confirm that you've taken the top teams of each division and pitted them against eachother.

So yeah, I'm sure you'll come up with many excellent points to defend the lack of a championship game in the Pac-10 and deride the addition of it in the SEC. We'll never, ever settle this debate. But why not give your fingers a workout, huh? ;-)

(No sarcasm at all meant in that last paragraph. Okay, maybe a little, but it's only in fun.)

Go Ducks. Go Vols.

* - My lady continues to lament the "loss" of the Rose Bowl to the BCS junta. That's a whole other box of cobras that shouldn't be opened.

by SnoConeGod on Oct 3, 2007 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions

I can't take a conference seriously that has...

...a championship game. The Pac-10 is the only conference where every team plays every other team. I'll take that over a stupid conference championship game any day. In the way the Pac-10 does it, you only get one chance against a team, and you can't dodge anyone. I hope the Pac-10 never expands beyond 10. It works perfectly for basketball and football.

Also, the anecdote about walking onto the Autzen field isn't so much an indicator about the state of conference but a difference of cultures.

Also, when you bring up the fact that the Pac-10 doesn't have teams that can line up with middle of the pack of the SEC, Georgia, Arkansas, etc., check out this article (written a few weeks ago): http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/bill_trocchi/09/20/conference.rankings/index.html.
The middle of the Pac-10 lines up quite nicely with the middle of the SEC. Granted, they have more teams, but that's just how it works. Honestly, I don't think that the middle of the SEC teams are that good this year. Alabama is dropping, Arkansas is bad, Georgia is inconsistent, SC is solid, but I think Oregon would rip through them. There just is little consistency in that group, and I think that Oregon, UCLA, and even Arizona State could do very nicely against those teams.

I think the Pac-10 will end up with 1/2 its teams in the Top-25 by the end of the season (USC, Cal, Oregon, UCLA, and Arizona State). I doubt the SEC will be able to say the same thing.

by jtlight on Oct 3, 2007 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions

Alrightie mkII

OK, difference of cultures, I'll give ya. But aren't all NCAA Div-1 football programs money-making behemoths that exist almost solely to put their names in the national conscience? And as such, doesn't it make sense that you'd want to protect not only the brand name of your school, but also everything that contributes to that brand? Does this not include the stadium and field that they perform on? Can I not ask another vaguely-rhetorical question?

I know the article you refer to - I read it within about 5 seconds of pulling it out of my mailbox, because its large picture and headline on the cover immediately made the SEC side of me cringe in a "wha-wha-WHAAA?" manner while the Oregon side of me said "Alright, more press for the boys in Thunder Green and Lightning Yellow!" (it's the same reason why I read the "SEC Power: On Any Given Saturday The Southeastern Conference Proves it's the Toughest in the Country" story last year within seconds of removing it from the mailbox...and why I still have it on the bookshelf). The argument a few weeks ago was a fair one, as is yours regarding "consistency".

Here's the rub, though. The other half of the argument, hearkening to your final sentence, is that the SEC regularly beats itself up. You rarely see a team come through the SEC unscathed because there's just so much talent among its ranks. Coaches recruit and demand the best (hence the gigantic number of 4- and 5-star recruits that ink their names on SEC school letterhead on National Signing Day). Boosters (and therein lies The Answer) demand blood. Why do you think 7 of the top 20 stadiums are in the SEC?

But I suppose that's true everywhere...then we get into an entirely different argument about the overly mis-appropriated budgets of Our Great Universities and their lost focus on why they exist in the first place (our Saturday heroes are all Communications majors for a reason, aren't they?). And that's just no fun on a sports-related site. We're all here for a reason, right? And it ain't academics. ;-)

Off point, sorry. And I seem to have forgotten what my point was (damn lack of debating skills).

I'll say this: it's nice to see the Pac-10 shedding its image of a group of panzy-boys out for a good time on a Saturday. It's nice to see them in the national spotlight, especially with 3 receiving legitimate top-10 rankings among the blogging world (which I think is quite a bit more well-informed and better-sampled than the AP'sters).

But I still think, head-to-head, the SEC is just plain better. No amount of argument one way or the other will sway me. You can call it pig-headed, you can call it "homer-love"...the fact remains that outside USC, I'd say at least five SEC teams could beat all the other Pac-10 schools in a neutral stadium on Saturday (namely, Florida, LSU, Georgia, Auburn, and Tennessee (pay no attention to the Cal game behind the curtain))

Despite that obviously hurtful statement (to both my newfound love of the Ducks, and you fellow members of the ATQ community), I still root for the Fellers from Eugene. And I still consider my time in the stands at Michigan Stadium earlier this year one of the best college football experiences of my life (as short as that history may be) *.

And I still post here about 99% more than I post on the Vols' sister site, Rocky Top Talk. ;-)

Go Ducks. Go Vols.

* - Of course, this is despite the fact that I'm batting an almost-o'fer in SEC matchups at Neyland. I've seen 2 losses to Florida, 1 to Scarolina, and probably 1 more to Geowwgia in just a scant few days. All this is vs 1 win against 'Bama last year. My Vol-fan-friends say I should stop going, for the benefit of The State of Tennesse (except the tiny contingent of Vandy fans in Nashvegas).

by SnoConeGod on Oct 3, 2007 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions

Fair enough

Hey, you think the SEC is the best conference. Though I don't agree necessarily, that's ok. I'm not quite willing to say that the Pac-10 is definitively the best conference, but they are definitely in the top 2, and the gap has been closed greatly from last year, especially from what Les Miles perceived (especially looking at the road games USC has to play versus LSU). What I like though is that, this year, no conference comes close to the Pac-10 or the SEC. The SEC is traditionally a great conference, and I really like that the Pac-10 is getting respect this year, and its respect has been growing in recent years.

Unfortunately, this issue will never be settled, and everyone will talk about it for no avail for years to come.

by jtlight on Oct 4, 2007 7:16 AM PDT up reply actions

So it occurred to me this morning

I always knew in the back of my head that it had occurred, but it never really hit home till this morning.

On my walk to work I saw a young co-ed wearing a Cal t-shirt. Shortly after passing her, I muttered "Go Ducks". In about 2 micro-seconds I realized I should have muttered "Go Vols", too.

Then that lightning bolt of frustration and upset-stomachedness hit me:

Damn you Cal for beating BOTH of my teams in the same month. Damn you straight to hell.

Go Ducks. Go Vols. Go Pac-10. ;-)

by SnoConeGod on Oct 4, 2007 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions

I respect your opinion

but I think that there are two fatal flaws:

The conference championship games are simply about money, and the fact that SEC and Big XII are too big to have a round robin. With a true round robin, there is no need for a championship game.
Part of the reason that there is nobody to matchup with some of those middle SEC teams is that the SEC is bigger. Cal, SC, ASU, and Oregon match up well with LSU, Fla, and SC and UGA at the top. Vandy and Miss State with Wazzu and Stanford at the bottom. But, as the SEC has two more teams, it is likely that at least one will be decent, giving the SEC an additional decent team.

I'm not saying necessairly that the Pac-10 is better, but I think that they are really comparable. For Miles to say that the SEC was so much better was out of line IMO.

As for baseball, since my team (Seattle) folded so pathetically in September, I'm gonna have to say Go Rockies!

by David Piper on Oct 3, 2007 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions

Yer killin me, Dave!

Why hate on the Cubbies, now? ;-)

by SnoConeGod on Oct 3, 2007 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions

no hating on the Cubbies

I like the Cubbies. Colorado is just such a good story.

My hate is reserved for Red Sox, Yankees, and especially Angels.

by David Piper on Oct 3, 2007 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions

Alrightie mkIII

Money makes the entire game go 'round. Look at the BCS. And true round-robin, while an idealistic method, isn't infallible. Shared championships suck worse than just about anything else in college football. Just ask the '04 Auburn team, or even the '03 Trojans. And take a quick look at the Big10 standings. The Wolverines (yes, that team we all stood, pointed, and laughed at after week 2) have an outside shot at the Big10 title this year. Of course, that doesn't help my point at all, because those were both horrible non-conference losses, so even if the Big10+1 had a champ. game, those wouldn't count. ;-)
Really, it comes down to January 1st bowl eligibility. Despite the number of teams in the SEC, more of the "also rans" you didn't name above have been pretty consistent Jan 1st'ers as compared with their Pac-10 counterparts (or lack thereof, no fault implied). Despite my team's struggles this year and last, Tennessee is almost always playing on Jan 1st. Look at Auburn - they shared a national title just a few years back, sporting an undefeated record. And they just beat one of our Power Schools in a hostile environment last week (somewhat-congruently, props to Mr. Willingham for almost motivating his boys last week vs. those ass monkeys from Troy). And every week I see 'Bama under Saban, I get more and more frightened, despite his satanistic program-killing nature. Talk about rekindling a rivalry (for those who don't know, Vol fans have kind of written off 'Bama as the #1 rival since around the turn of the millenium, choosing instead to focus all our hatred on the city of Gainesville, FL).

Alright, time to revise things. Les Miles whipped his piece out and let if flap in the wind with a gigantic, purple and yellow SEC-LSU flag hanging off the end of it. If you look at the previous few years, he was pretty spot-on. Yes, the Pac-10 has redeemed - no - ASSERTED itself this year as a legitimate power conference that matches up against its bretheren in the south and upper-midwest (ha!). But despite this closing gap, I think he's still right.

I guess it all comes down to the recruiting game. Happy hunting, fellas. (and damn you Patrick Turner for spurning the Vols on the eve of signing day, you turncoat money-grubber)

Go Ducks. Go Vols.

by SnoConeGod on Oct 3, 2007 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions