Pac 10 Overrated?

[jwinslow]

I still have not considered Iowa a national powerhouse, so I don't even know how to answer that second statement.

I guess we will agree to disagree. I have had trouble following your argument too, when we jump from the 10 year discussion I suggested, to the 80s, and then suddenly to a small capsule of this year being the evidence for Oregon vs. UM.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

iowa had some damn good teams in the 80s

washington had some damn good teams in the late 80s early 90s

zona had desert swarm.


lets all unbunch our panties and say and say its apples to oranges. these teams dont play enough games against each other in the past 3-4 years to really stack up. and who gives a shit. if you want to compare oregon to ohio state (assuming thats the whole reason this was started) flat out compare them and use some bull shit computer method, not shit youre half heartedly remembering and pulling out of your asses...

 

[crazybuckfan40]

Ok Big Ten vs. Pac-10.

The Pac-10 has 5 bowl eligble teams(could have 5 with an upset of standford over Notre Dame today)

The Big 10 has 7.

In head to head games the Pac-10 was 2-1, but they were all on the left coast.

Purdue beat Zona.
ASU destroyed NW.
Cal beat Ill.(Ill was up by 10 at half, yeah ILL)

I say a push here b/c there is not a large enough sample and the games were all on the left coast and didnt envolve any big teams.

The big Ten has 4 ranked teams could easily have six if they would put Iowa and Minny in there.

The Pac-10 has 3.

Of the bowl eligble teams in the Pac-10 they are lucky to have, 5 b/c ASU almost lost thier chance when they were down all game to Zona. Not exactally a powerhouse team in your conference. Then it took Cal wins over the last place big Ten team, Sac. St. and New Mexico st. to be bowl eligble. They also had two teams miss out by one game. Standford lost thier chance by losing to CAL DAVIS . And Oregon St. played a pretty good OOC schedule with Boise St. and @ Louisville.

All the bowl eligble teams played some tough games OOC. Iowa played Northern Iowa, but also played ISU. That was only team not in division one that a bowl eligble team played. Of the two teams that went 5-6 and just missed it, MSU beat Notre Dame, the same team that it took USC a last second drive to beat. Purdue also played Notre Dame and they also had a game against Akron(who is in the mac championship game) I guess the law of percentages work against you when you have 11 teams, Even if a team went .500 in the big ten they would have to win all their OOC games. 7 Teams with two right on the verge is pretty damn impressive.


The Pac-10 scheduled games against the likes of Grambling St., Montana, Northern Az., Portland St., Sac. St., and Cal-Davis(that is six teams not in Div I). Hell they even lost one.

The Big-10 had two Northern Iowa and Nicholls St.

I would say that the Pac-10 had 9 tough OOC games. There were 3 against Notre Dame, 1 @ Louisville, LSU, Oklahoma, 2 vs. Fresno. All of these were at home besides @ Louisville and 1 @ NOtre Lame.

We also had 3 games against Notre Lame and we went there twice. We had a game against @Iowa St., Texas, @ North Carolina, South FL., and Akron.

There were also quite a few against the Mac teams who have been known to play big tems tough. Especially the likes of N.ILL. twice. BG, Akron, and Miami(OH).

Now to the head to head Comparisions:

USC vs. PSU - I say even(depends on where it is at)
Oregon vs. tOSU - tOSU
UCLA vs. Wisky - UCLA by a close margin
Cal vs. NW - even
ASU vs. Iowa - Iowa
Standford vs. scUM - do I need to ask scUM
OSU vs. Minny - once again do I need to ask - Minny
Zona vs. Purdue - they already matched up at Zona and Purdue won
Wazzu vs. MSU - MSU has a big win and played scUM, tOSU, and PSU fairly close edge MSU
Wash vs. Indiana/Ill - I would say that Indiana/Wash/ILL in that order, even know Ill did give the 4th best team a run for their money.

 

[lvbuckeye]

LV, the pairings are not that far off and actually add to the argument that neither conference is overrated. If the Pac 10 was overrated as stated by a few folks, their #3 seed should be about equivalent to our #5 or #6 eh?

JW, Wide range of mediocrity? Well, the sky is blue. Of course there is a wide range. It works like this, if you weren't in first, challenge for first late in the season, or in the bottom two....you are mediocre. Mediocre is 60% of the teams in America. Mediocre is everyone past #7 or 8 in the top 25. Really...the top 7 or so teams could beat the mess out of each other on any given day. Then, you slide to mediocrity...anyone else just start slapping teams down in your poll when you got to about 15? Mediocrity.

Mediocre = insignificant.

However, my point as the devil's advocate in this thread, is that how can the Pac 10 be overrated when they are holding their own against our "superior" conference? Why are our teams mediocre and their's overrated?
There is a difference between being a homer and just being ignorant to reality.

point of order: 25/117=.214
NO team in the Top 25, by your definition, is mediocre... using your 60% model, the teams ranked 26-96 are mediocre, and only the bottom 21 teams are "bad."

 

[osugrad21]

point of order: 25/117=.214
NO team in the Top 25, by your definition, is mediocre... using your 60% model, the teams ranked 26-96 are mediocre, and only the bottom 21 teams are "bad."

I teach English not math...but my point is that outside of the top 7 or eight teams, it is a crapshoot after that. If I knew how to use a calculator, I would

However, I stand by my point there...evn if it is mathematically flawed :)

 

[lvbuckeye]

I teach English not math...but my point is that outside of the top 7 or eight teams, it is a crapshoot after that. If I knew how to use a calculator, I would

However, I stand by my point there...evn if it is mathematically flawed :)

i'll give you your top 7-8 teams in an all time comparison, though it also must be noted that well, a medicore (by your definition) Fresno State team played USC down to the wire, and hung pretty well for three quarters against Oregon...

i guess that i would agree with you to an extent, if we changed the verbiage: 7-8 teams are elite. the next 17-22 are good. then we get to the mediocrity... i'll use TSUN as an example. i think we would all pretty much agree that scUM is mediocre this year. however, i think that they were a few key injuries (and a VERY tight-sphinctered coach) from elite status... then we have Northwestern. they're good, but definitely not great; maybe just off the cups of mediocrity, but nowhere near elite... but what about Auburn? where do they fit? they came out the first game of the year with basically a completely new offense and laid an egg against a VERY active D... then they got their shit together in a hurry, and if not for one absolute debacle of a placekicking performance, outplayed the LSU Tigers... i think it's fine line... i'm much more likely to think of War Eagle as an elite team this year than a mediocre one...

answer me this: who would you put your vCash on in an Oregon-Auburn matchup? how about Auburn-Fresno? or even an Auburn-LSU rematch?

i realize that you are the Devil's Advocate in this discussion...

 

[osugrad21]

My definition of mediocrity is a team that is unpredictable. tOSU was mediocre when we didn't know which offense would show up...mediocre teams lose games they should win and win games they should lose. I can see some mediocre teams as good, like Michigan this year, but under my definition of mediocrity, they were equally as bad at times. They lost to other mediocre teams who fell into the same cycle.

By 7-8 teams, I am not referencing historical stature. Instead, I see the top 7-8 teams differently year to year, and oftentimes, week to week. The truly great teams rise to the top and maintain that status over an entire season or a series of seasons. Consistency is the key to killing mediocrity.

As for your picks, well I see that as a perfect supplement to my viewpoint. Each of those games could be considered a crapshoot. Each team has the potential to be good and even great. However, which team will show up?
My entire argument in this thread lies in the fact that we as fans see our conference of choice as solid top to close to bottom. We all give up the cupcakes such as Illinois but can argue the merits of teams such as Minny, NW, and Purdue. Those teams can scare you or even knock you off. Why aren't other conference fans given that same understanding? There is an argument for homerism there, but there is also an element of blindness and a lack of understanding imho. Which is the better conference? Dunno...and who can really say unless we had a round robin tourney and used actual head to head matchups. However, I do know that the Pac 10 is solid D1 football and much of the disrespect and dismissal is misguided when you assume the same method of assessment used to validate our own conference.

At least that is the way I see it.

 

[JXC]

If the question is, "Is the Pac-10 overrated?" Then the answer is "no!". For the conference to be overrated, the media and college football fans as a whole would have to think it was good. And they don't. The common feeling in college football is that the Pac-10 is not as good as the rest of the major conferences except the Big East...and therefore, they aren't overrated...they are rated right where they should be. Not very highly.

 

[JohnnyCockfight]

The Pac 10's best team has been better than any conference's best team for the past few years, so I'm thinking USC deserves its own category for a contemporaneous discussion. USC has been in a class of its own as compared to OSU, Mich, and Penn St. And Penn St. has downright sucked it before this season. One bowl game in seven seasons I heard somewhere--that's awful.

The Pac 10 and Big Ten are comparable. Look at the head-to-heads for the past few years, and give them some credit for what USC has done for crying out loud.

 

[jwinslow]

If the question is, "Is the Pac-10 overrated?" Then the answer is "no!". For the conference to be overrated, the media and college football fans as a whole would have to think it was good. And they don't. The common feeling in college football is that the Pac-10 is not as good as the rest of the major conferences except the Big East...and therefore, they aren't overrated...they are rated right where they should be. Not very highly.

grad, this was what I was trying to post earlier during my stumbling posts...

 

[osugrad21]

grad, this was what I was trying to post earlier during my stumbling posts...

and I still disagree. The opinions of the masses do not change my personal opinion.

 

[jwinslow]

and I still disagree.

I figured that, I thought I'd just clarify what I meant before since you seemed confused before. However, I think the pac10 is a stronger conference than the big12 this year (we would be hearing talk of a 1 loss LSU/PSU jumping texas had they not scheduled OSU this year), and is close to the ACC (tho the ACC has more powerhouse programs). I don't think its anywhere close to the Big 10 or SEC.

 

[lvbuckeye]

The Pac 10's best team has been better than any conference's best team for the past few years, so I'm thinking USC deserves its own category for a contemporaneous discussion. USC has been in a class of its own as compared to OSU, Mich, and Penn St. And Penn St. has downright sucked it before this season. One bowl game in seven seasons I heard somewhere--that's awful.

The Pac 10 and Big Ten are comparable. Look at the head-to-heads for the past few years, and give them some credit for what USC has done for crying out loud.

no one is taking anything away from USC... there just seems to be a trend-- at least to me-- that the #1 team plays in a weak (or no) conference...

Miami was a power when they were independent, that didn't change in the weak Big East. now they struggle in a pretty good ACC- which must be noted plays MUCH better defense than the Big Ten this year...

Florida State used to roll every year in the weak ACC... now, the coaching there had improved tremendously, and Free Shoes is a shadow of its former self... i just can't see Bowden sticking around much longer... he has already stated that he's out as soon as it looks like the ship is going down...

Penn State was a power as an independent... within 5 years of joining the Big Ten, they were having bad season after bad season.

Oklahoma was considered 'the greatest team ever' though they played in a conference that was extrememly top heavy. then they were exposed by K State/LSU and USC in consecutive seasons...

now, it must be noted, that so far SC has taken all comers, and has usually laid the wood, but i just have to think that they wouldn't be on this 33 game winning streak if they played in the SEC, ACC or Big Ten... call me crazy... i think that UCLA is a decent team. they have plenty of talent, but something's missing in the heart department- or something... same goes for Oregon. beating up on teams that play patty cake defense, and Wazzo UW, ASU, OSU, Stanford, and Cal ALL qualify here, doesn't cut it for me...

i realize that the Brain Trust in the Pac Ten is more offensively minded than the Big Ten, SEC, or ACC, but you can't convince me that Penn State, Ohio State, Va Tech, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Texas or any other high profile team with a solid D would be in any other position than USC is if the positions were switched... well, Texas already IS in that postion in the weak Big XII, which is why they average 50 points per game... it's also why they only scored 25 against us...

i dunno, maybe i just love defense. i know that the Big Ten is down in that department, but is it any wonder that the two best D's shared the Big Ten title?

offensively, the Pac Ten is great, defensively, it's a pillow fight every week... to me that equals mediocrity...

 

[Sdgobucks]

This makes my head hurt

 

[osubartender23]

The Pac 10 and Big Ten are comparable. Look at the head-to-heads for the past few years, and give them some credit for what USC has done for crying out loud.

So because USC has been good for the last few years that would mean that the PAC 10 has been good also? I give USC credit for what USC has done but not the PAC 10. The conferences are only as good as thier weakest link and this year its pretty safe to say that both conferences have glaring weak links at the bottom, but the PAC 10 only has one team that stands out head and shoulders above the others. That's USC.

Taking the 1 weak link team from each conference and the 3 top teams here is what the matchups would look like if conference standings remained as is.

Top

USC vs. Penn St(Big 10 BCS bid)
In this game it would be close. USC defensively is not nearly as strong as they have been the last 2 years, so if they face a team that can control the ball on offense, without turning it over, then they could be in for a close game. Advantage USC

Oregon vs. Ohio State(match up of conference #2's)
This game would be close but I think OSU would win by 10 points, because Oregon hasnt faced a defense like OSU's this year. USC's D is included in that. Advantage OSU

UCLA vs Michigan. (# 3's)
This game would be extremely close. If its played in LA, advantage UCLA. If its played in Ann Arbor, advantage SCUM. If its played at a neutral site the odds would be almost EVEN. Overall Advantage= Even

Now matchup of the last place teams in the conf.

Washington/ Washington St(both teams are 1-7 in league play) vs Illinois(0-8) I think this is a game that no one would really care to watch so Im going to say Advantage: Who Cares.

The point Im trying to make is just because USC has been extremely good over the last couple of years doesnt mean the whole PAC 10 has. The rest of the comparisons were just for fun because there has been so many hypothetical match ups and such throughout this thread that I think that people have lost sight of some of the points of the arguements. Are we arguing conference superiority over a specific time frame? Just this year? The last 10 years? Or what? Because I see alot of stats and match ups being thrown around without having any parameters set on what exactly needs to be compared. We are just adding stats and such that supports the way we are arguing. So if this is going to continue I say we make it clear if its an arguement for just this year or what, that way everyone can be on the same page and not have to jump around to try to one up each other!

In a side note the BIG 10 is better!:osu: just had to throw my .02 in. JMHO of course bias and homerism included in it.