Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Perspective on the PAC 12
Tequilla
Member Posts: 20,101
No PAC team has gone undefeated in the conference since Oregon in 2010.
Since 1988 (30 seasons), it has happened in the PAC 8 times
2010: Oregon
2005: USC
2004: USC
1998: UCLA
1996: ASU
1991: UW
1989: USC (had a tie, 7 game conference schedule)
1988: USC
Of all of those teams, only 2010 Oregon made it through a 9 game conference schedule.
The 2010 Oregon team lost in the National Title game.
2004 USC won a national title (I don't give a shit about what the NCAA does after the fact) and 2005 USC lost in the Title game.
The 1998 UCLA team started 10-0 before losing in the final week of the regular season at Miami and then in the Rose Bowl to Wisconsin.
The 1996 ASU team lost to Ohio State in the Rose Bowl and probably would have been #1 had Ohio State not scored in the final minute.
1991 UW won a share of the National Championship.
The 1989 USC team wasn't far from being great as it finished 9-2-1 with the 2 losses being a 1 point loss Week 1 to a 10-2 Illinois team with Jeff George, a 4 point loss at then #1 Notre Dame (who finished 2nd), and then a tie versus a 3-7-1 UCLA team that lost 4 games by 3 points or less (3 of them being 1 point defeats).
The 1988 USC team started the year 10-0 before losing to #1 and eventual national champions Notre Dame and then in the Rose Bowl to Michigan.
Basically, the TL, DR version is that going undefeated through the PAC is difficult (has happened 8 times in the last 30 years) and each of those teams that have done so are either National Champions (UW/USC), on the verge of a National Championship (Oregon, USC, ASU, and UCLA) with a few breaks or bounces of the ball.
Since 1988 (30 seasons), it has happened in the PAC 8 times
2010: Oregon
2005: USC
2004: USC
1998: UCLA
1996: ASU
1991: UW
1989: USC (had a tie, 7 game conference schedule)
1988: USC
Of all of those teams, only 2010 Oregon made it through a 9 game conference schedule.
The 2010 Oregon team lost in the National Title game.
2004 USC won a national title (I don't give a shit about what the NCAA does after the fact) and 2005 USC lost in the Title game.
The 1998 UCLA team started 10-0 before losing in the final week of the regular season at Miami and then in the Rose Bowl to Wisconsin.
The 1996 ASU team lost to Ohio State in the Rose Bowl and probably would have been #1 had Ohio State not scored in the final minute.
1991 UW won a share of the National Championship.
The 1989 USC team wasn't far from being great as it finished 9-2-1 with the 2 losses being a 1 point loss Week 1 to a 10-2 Illinois team with Jeff George, a 4 point loss at then #1 Notre Dame (who finished 2nd), and then a tie versus a 3-7-1 UCLA team that lost 4 games by 3 points or less (3 of them being 1 point defeats).
The 1988 USC team started the year 10-0 before losing to #1 and eventual national champions Notre Dame and then in the Rose Bowl to Michigan.
Basically, the TL, DR version is that going undefeated through the PAC is difficult (has happened 8 times in the last 30 years) and each of those teams that have done so are either National Champions (UW/USC), on the verge of a National Championship (Oregon, USC, ASU, and UCLA) with a few breaks or bounces of the ball.
Comments
-
More perspective, over the same 30 season time interval, only 37 times have teams finished the season with just 1 loss (or better) in conference during the regular season. It has happened more often than one would think that more than 1 loss has won the conference and/or division.
Should this UW team finish 8-1 in conference this year (which is still very, very much in play), it would still be a tremendous accomplishment regardless of whether they win the North or conference by doing so.
-
If we go 8-1, beat SUC in the championship game in front of hundreds and jeans stadium, then beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl, that's not bad. This team hasn't shown its capable of that.
-
Eight tims, and four of those are USC. Kriminy.
-
The respect is real.creepycoug said:Eight tims, and four of those are USC. Kriminy.
-
What does it take to win out?Fire_Marshall_Bill said:If we go 8-1, beat SUC in the championship game in front of hundreds and jeans stadium, then beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl, that's not bad. This team hasn't shown its capable of that.
Beating Colorado and Oregon St at home ... Cal on the road. We should be able to do both of those particularly as it is looking like Cal's an absolute mess at the moment and can't throw the ball.
Beating Stanford at home should be expected ... not sure what evidence there is to think that we shouldn't be a favorite in that spot.
At this point, the Cougs have not shown that they can even be competitive against UW. That being said, I do question whether our lack of pass rush puts us in a far more dangerous position this year against them as I suspect this will be a far closer game this time around. That being said, we are so much more physical than they are that until they prove it then it's hard to get behind the Cougs.
As for the P12 title game, if it is USC then you've got a young, mistake-prone QB combined with a team that is just flat out sloppy. I suspect that USC loses to Utah this weekend and then we'll see what else happens for Utah the rest of the season.
UW's far from a perfect team, but it's still the best team in the conference, Oregon's about a quarter to half step behind this year, and then everybody else is a good couple of steps behind that.
-
Lol. That’s not going to happen. Uw loses at least one more. Maybe two. Also, Oregon has to lose one more for uw to have a chance to go to the pac 12 championship. Uw does not control it’s own destinyFire_Marshall_Bill said:If we go 8-1, beat SUC in the championship game in front of hundreds and jeans stadium, then beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl, that's not bad. This team hasn't shown its capable of that.
-
No one but Stanford controls their own destiny right now.MikeDamone said:
Lol. That’s not going to happen. Uw loses at least one more. Maybe two. Also, Oregon has to lose one more for uw to have a chance to go to the pac 12 championship. Uw does not control it’s own destinyFire_Marshall_Bill said:If we go 8-1, beat SUC in the championship game in front of hundreds and jeans stadium, then beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl, that's not bad. This team hasn't shown its capable of that.
-
Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
-
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error. -
WSU does too.YellowSnow said:
No one but Stanford controls their own destiny right now.MikeDamone said:
Lol. That’s not going to happen. Uw loses at least one more. Maybe two. Also, Oregon has to lose one more for uw to have a chance to go to the pac 12 championship. Uw does not control it’s own destinyFire_Marshall_Bill said:If we go 8-1, beat SUC in the championship game in front of hundreds and jeans stadium, then beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl, that's not bad. This team hasn't shown its capable of that.
-
Not sure what you are talking about.Tequilla said:
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error.
Losing to Oregon on the road is an embarassment and it proves that Petersen is a loser and Cristobal is a God -
Welp. It turns out Auburn sucks and it may be that Oregon doesn’t. But the game yesterday, while not being a changing of the guard, looked like the PAC 12 N may be the 2nd or 3rd toughest P5 division in the country for the next few years to come. And you have to play all of them every year.Tequilla said:
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error. -
Forgot about them. It's easy to do.MikeDamone said:
WSU does too.YellowSnow said:
No one but Stanford controls their own destiny right now.MikeDamone said:
Lol. That’s not going to happen. Uw loses at least one more. Maybe two. Also, Oregon has to lose one more for uw to have a chance to go to the pac 12 championship. Uw does not control it’s own destinyFire_Marshall_Bill said:If we go 8-1, beat SUC in the championship game in front of hundreds and jeans stadium, then beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl, that's not bad. This team hasn't shown its capable of that.
-
YellowSnow said:
No one but Stanford controls their own destiny right now.MikeDamone said:
Lol. That’s not going to happen. Uw loses at least one more. Maybe two. Also, Oregon has to lose one more for uw to have a chance to go to the pac 12 championship. Uw does not control it’s own destinyFire_Marshall_Bill said:If we go 8-1, beat SUC in the championship game in front of hundreds and jeans stadium, then beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl, that's not bad. This team hasn't shown its capable of that.
WSU does but I don’t see it fappening. I like our? Chances next week though. -
When you're highest paid and most reputable coach in the conference, you finish that game. Don't care about it being a road game or the opponent coming off a bye. To choke like that is embarrassing.dhdawg said:
Not sure what you are talking about.Tequilla said:
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error.
Losing to Oregon on the road is an embarassment and it proves that Petersen is a loser and Cristobal is a God -
Sometimes average teams beat good ones, good ones give up in the second half of the season after losing two, an average team gets hot for a few weeks. This is college football. Shit changes and weird stuff happens.salemcoog said:
Welp. It turns out Auburn sucks and it may be that Oregon doesn’t. But the game yesterday, while not being a changing of the guard, looked like the PAC 12 N may be the 2nd or 3rd toughest P5 division in the country for the next few years to come. And you have to play all of them every year.Tequilla said:
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error.
The only thing I know is that Alabama is always great under Saban, Ohio State isn't going anywhere, and Clemson has earned top tier status. -
if someone is going undefeated in conference once every 4 years that is not too difficult. If I had any ambition I would check the other 4 major conferences to see how we compare before making a rash statement about how tough it is.
Of course, 50% of those numbers is mighty USC - so 1 in 8 sounds better for us common folk
I didn't realize maff would be involved -
I'll take run first physicality over one dimensional air raid every time.
-
That wasn't learned yesterday … that's been the case for a whilesalemcoog said:
Welp. It turns out Auburn sucks and it may be that Oregon doesn’t. But the game yesterday, while not being a changing of the guard, looked like the PAC 12 N may be the 2nd or 3rd toughest P5 division in the country for the next few years to come. And you have to play all of them every year.Tequilla said:
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error.
SEC West
Big 10 East
PAC 12 North
Whatever order that you want to put that at. -
Also important to keep in mind that 7 of those 8 instances come in conference schedules of 8 games or less …LebamDawg said:if someone is going undefeated in conference once every 4 years that is not too difficult. If I had any ambition I would check the other 4 major conferences to see how we compare before making a rash statement about how tough it is.
Of course, 50% of those numbers is mighty USC - so 1 in 8 sounds better for us common folk
I didn't realize maff would be involved
It's always going to be difficult to run the table in a 9 game conference schedule. -
That's a fancy TL, DR way to say this conference sucks ass.
Only one team with a title in the last 25 years. DRECK! -
With our issues and unknowns on D next year at DL/LB what will be our margin for error in 2019? Eason better be good as advertised, and we need at least two of the wr's from the last 2 classes to pop this year like Fuller.Tequilla said:
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error. -
I suspect that the offense will be far more dynamic next year ... Eason should be an upgrade at QB with his arm talent. Assuming Adams is back healthy next year, there's 4 returning starters on the OL. Sample is gone at TE but everybody else is back, Bryant will be back healthy, and Culp should be in a position to contribute. At WR everybody is back plus you throw in Osborne, Spiker, and potentially Bynum/Cook emerge. I think Ahmed has a bit of growth still needed at the RB position but you're going to get good reps out of McGrew and Pleasant at minimum. This will be a very strong offense.godawgst said:
With our issues and unknowns on D next year at DL/LB what will be our margin for error in 2019? Eason better be good as advertised, and we need at least two of the wr's from the last 2 classes to pop this year like Fuller.Tequilla said:
UW's lost 2 games this year by 8 points, one of the games in OT, both on the road, and all of a sudden the sky is falling?YellowSnow said:Good shit Teq. But apparently having an understanding of the history of the sort makes one a Doog around here.
Just doesn't make sense when you consider that this is a year that everybody with half of a brain knew would be a year with a really small margin for error.
On D, it's a case where we lose a lot of experience but potentially replace with more talent. We'll need guys that are redshirting this year to come in and make contributions. There's talent at the LB position but it will be young. Need growth out of the outside guys or some guys to sell some couches. The DBs will be fine.
Honestly, I think that there's a good chance that this team is as good and/or better than this year's team. -
Is Adams back next year a high probability? That would be encouraging if he’s able to play next year. Last I heard, weeks ago, was that it could be career-ending.
-
Even if he is you have 4 returning starters with Hilbers
