Cougs at #21 in Coaches preseason poll
- Thread starter ScottHood
- Start date
Five total Pac-12 schools get in to the top 25. Four of those from the north.
I believe that this will be one of those years where six or seven teams beat the shit out of each other all year and by the end there is maybe one or two that is ranked.
It is critical, in my mind, that everyone take care of business out of conference. Particularly the USCs of the world that generally play two additional P5 schools. A 10-2 ND with losses to USC and Stanford helps us a lot.
My own personal belief, and I know it is not shared by everyone, is that the national perception of the conference is largely tied to USCs success.
I believe that this will be one of those years where six or seven teams beat the shit out of each other all year and by the end there is maybe one or two that is ranked.
It is critical, in my mind, that everyone take care of business out of conference. Particularly the USCs of the world that generally play two additional P5 schools. A 10-2 ND with losses to USC and Stanford helps us a lot.
My own personal belief, and I know it is not shared by everyone, is that the national perception of the conference is largely tied to USCs success.
Agree with your assessment re: USC. The national media automatically assumes the Trojans are one of the best P12 teams every year. So when USC is down, they think the P12 is down as well. USC FB = Kentucky basketball in SEC.
#12 Oregon v. #16 Auburn is a huge week one game for the Pac-12. The Ducks are the top ranked team in the conference while Auburn is the sixth ranked SEC team. If the Ducks lose, it's going to confirm the preconception that our conference is weak.
Unfortunately Auburn losing does nothing to tarnish the SEC's reputation. They'll remain a top 25 team because Oregon is a quality loss, beat up on two cupcakes enter conference play ranked around 20 and their loss will give a boost to whatever team beats them so the conference will still have at least 6 teams in the top 25.
It would also be nice if Miami would knock off Florida, even though Florida would maintain a top 25 ranking too.
Unfortunately Auburn losing does nothing to tarnish the SEC's reputation. They'll remain a top 25 team because Oregon is a quality loss, beat up on two cupcakes enter conference play ranked around 20 and their loss will give a boost to whatever team beats them so the conference will still have at least 6 teams in the top 25.
It would also be nice if Miami would knock off Florida, even though Florida would maintain a top 25 ranking too.
if the ducks lose it will mean they are still over rated and likely in need of a better coach
FWIW, the mutts are #12 and Oregon is #13, so technically, UW is still regarded as the best team in the conference. Still, the rest of your points are valid. Love or hate the ducks, we need them to win if we don't want the Pac-12 to be considered a nobody before the end of the Labor Day weekend.
Watching the ducks in their bowl game told us much of what we need to know about UO. I will not be surprised if Auburn rolls
Auburn's d-line was monstrous last year and they underachieved mightily. If most of that unit is back then the Duck backfield is going to have to live up to the hype and make some plays because regardless of stars, they are going to be outmanned up front
Mutts is more overrated then the ducks.
While the ducks coach is not good, the ducks have the talent, depth, experience, have a LOT returning, a good QB, etc
The Mutts have lost their QB, Gaskins, WR's, Their WHOLE DEFENSE, have no depth, no experience, a overrated, ok at best, QB, comparable to WSU's QB, Gordon, 1 RB that either comparable or not as good as Deon Mc Intosh, that is inexperienced, almost no WR's, NO DEFENSE.
That is not a #12 in nation team..
That is a #23 team, a team that win about 5,6,7,8 games as its likely win range.
That the polls would put tge FUSKIES at #12 shows how little the polls know.
FWIW, I didn't say that I think the mutts are the best team in the conference. I said that they are regarded as the best team in the conference. I agree that this is a year where we could see the mutts fall to an 8-4 or 7-5 type season pretty easily. Of course, like him or not, Captain Pete is a very, very good coach and they could surprise. If you put a gun to my head, my bet is that the mutts are 7-4 heading into the Apple Cup and WSU is 8-3. The Apple Cup will determine which team is better again and I hope that this is the year we get that damned monkey off our back.
I know there is no other way to gauge it, but I don’t think one head to head matchup determines what team is better. That day maybe yes.
BTW, I wanted to point a bit of hypocrisy in your recent posting. Last week, I suggested that WSU's win range for this season was between 5 and 12 wins with 8 wins being my O/U. I was lambasted by you because you felt that Leach has proven that he has built up a program that is now expecting success and that there was no way that WSU could finish with only 5 wins.
Of note, you mention in your post quoted above that you think that UW is likely to finish with between 5 and 8 wins. Following is a list of the records for WSU and UW for the past three seasons:
2018
WSU 11-2
UW 10-4 (Pac-12 Champion)
2017
UW 10-3 (Fiesta Bowl)
WSU 9-4
2016
UW 12-2 (Pac-12 Champion & CFP Participant)
WSU 8-5
The mutts have gone 32-9 in the past three seasons, won the conference twice and made it to the college football playoff. They were invited to a BCS bowl in the "off" year. WSU has gone 28-11 in the same time frame, lost all three games against the mutts and has only been in the final Top 25 one time in that time span. I'm not a fan of the mutts and I love what Leach is building at WSU, but I find it funny that you'd write a huge diatribe explaining why WSU CAN'T WIN ONLY FIVE GAMES, but you have no problem assuming that UW is going to have that possibility. There's a thing called intellectual integrity and there are days where you don't do a good job of exhibiting it.
Heard on the sports talk radio, national guys, had exactly this sentiment. Didn't talk about the mutts, and only mentioned the Sucks because of their $$, but pretty much said that the P12 goes (reputation wise) how $C goes.
Not that its right, but until another team gets to a NC and shows that they belong there that perception is not going to change.
HOWEVER - that won't keep them (east coast bias media) from being on the jock of every mid-tier SEC/ B10 team.
With the ACC networking being bought by ESPN, it's only a matter of time before they get hyped up as a super conference. Look for ESPN to push the ACC/SEC all day, everyday (at least for college football).
Still Apples an Oranges Comparison.
Pretty Much Almost Nobody, No Pac 12 team, etc, has LOST(NOT games) as Much EXPERIENCE, and maybe might even Talent, with as LITTLE replacing that, in the last about 2,3,4 years, then the fuskies have since from the end of last year to the beginning of this coming season.
If that had happened to WSU, Ore St, etc, even with a Leach, Peterson type coach, that would be a 3,4,5,6,7 win team for either WSU, Ore St.
And before you say that that happened to WSU this year, That didnt happen to WSU this year.
WSU hasnt LOST(Not games) even close to as much as the Fuskies have this year. And even if it were close, WSU has done a pretty good job of REPLACING what they have lost.
And the fuskies have not done a good job of, and have done a bad job of replacing what they have lost ON PAPER.
And there is a limit to Plug and Play, and Plug and Play will only go so far.
And because of all that, since WSU, Ore St would only win about 3,4,5,6,7 games if they were in the fuskies shoes this season, and since the fuskies, have a traditionally better program, to the point that the fuskies would win about 5,6 5.5 games at minimum, to about 8,9, 8.5 games at maximum, in the situation they are in, instead of the 3 to 7 win range WSU, Ore St would get in their shoes, this season.
So the fuskies winning about 5,6, 5.5 to about 8,9,8.5 games is pretty realistic, based on above.
And WSU winning about 7,8,9, ave 8 wins at minimum to about 9,10, 11, ave 10 wins at maximum, with 6,7 games at worst, with only 4,5 wins almost impossible(.000001% chance), is pretty realistic.
Why?
Because WSU has a better team ON PAPER, then the fuskies this season, and have not lost(not games), as much as the fuskies, and have replaced what they have lost better, and have more TALENT, EXPERIENCE, DEPTH, ETC, then the fuskies do this season ON PAPER.
And when you, others say how can WSU be better when they lost to the fuskies? thats wrong to say, think that.
Doesnt matter in a way that WSU lost to fuskies.
WSU was 11-2 last year. Fuskies won about 8,9 games last year. WSU won their bowl game. Fuskies lost their bowl game.
So WSU was the better team, record wise, talent, etc, DESPITE losing to the fuskies.
And the ONLY reason why Fuskies even won that game is because they GOT LUCKY, SNOW, ICE, etc.
And before anybody says "But the fuskies had to play in that too", everybody should know that playing in SNOW, ICE, FAVORS the kind of team the fuskies have, over the kind of team WSU is, has.
So WSU was the better team last season then the fuskies.
And WSU is the better team then the fuskies, this season, no matter what happens vs the fuskies.
And because of that WSU's win range is 1,2, 2.5 wins on both the low side, high side then the fuskies
So that means that the fuskies win about 5,6, 5.5 games at minimum to about 8,9, 8.5 wins at maximum, and about 7 wins at average
And WSU should win about 6,7, 8, ave of 7 games at minimum, to about 9,10,11, ave of 10 games at maximum, and about 8.5 games at average, which is also their over, under.
Thats realistic, Logical
Last edited:
Mik ... interesting . Before last year what interior Dline talent had you seen that said experience and talent? What did you see from Minshew as a partial starter at ecu that would have led you to believe he was a Heisman candidate?
If I recall right UW returns their entire oline save McGary but Adams is coming back . They have a unreal talent coming back at TE. A five star talent arm wise at QB.
While I hope you are right they are a seven loss team, with one coming from us, Flat seems to be correct in seeing the inconsistency with your argument.
There is nothing wrong with mik being a myopic homer - its fun sometimes to drink the crimson kool-aid. I don't know why anyone would get all butt-hurt about it - its his opinion and we'll see how it plays out at the end of the year. Thats what makes predictions fun - someone is right and someone gets their nose rubbed in their own sh!t.
My take on mik is this - In my community we have a saying: "you're dippin' in the kool-aid but you don't even know the flavor."
sorry, I had to.
Your not comprehending, Understanding what I said.
I DID NOT SAY THAT UW LOSE 7 THIS YEAR.
I SAID ABOUT 5,6, 5.5 WINS AT MINIMUM TO ABOUT 8,9,8.5 WINS AT MAXIMUM, AND ABOUT 7 WINS(NOT LOSSES LIKE U ED, SAID OR THOUGHT).
The UW O Line is Experienced, etc, like you said. It's also THE ONLY SPOT that hasnt lost a lot of experience, etc.
QB: WAS inconsistent, and benched as starter, at the previous P5 that transfered from, and is a freaking STATUE that doesnt move
RB: No Gaskins, etc, just a sophmore that about the equivalent to WSU's Deon Mc Intosh
WR: No Ross, no standout names, young, inexperienced.
OL: Experienced: If wasnt for the OL to save QB Statue, UW probably would 1,2 games less the average of about 7 wins.
Defense: Pretty Much about whole bunch of True freshman, Redshirt Freshman, True Sophmores, Redshirt Sophmores, with little to almost no, less experience, talent, etc, compared to last years team:
Pac 12 offenses, including WSU, should destroy that UW defense this year.
If that was WSU, Ore State, instead of UW with what UW had, didnt have, that would be about 3,4, 3.5 wins, at minimum, 6,7,8, ave of 7, wins at maximum, about 5,5.5 wins at average.
But since its UW, UW should win about 5,6, 5.5 wins minimum, to about 8,9,8.5 wins maximum, and about 7 games at average, about 1.5 games, wins better then they would be if they were WSU, with what UW has, dont have.
Thats about 7 wins, on average for UW, ED, NOT 7 LOSSES for UW, ED.
Thats realistic ED.
And WSU should get about 6,7,8, average of 7 wins, at minimum, to about 9,10,11 wins at maximum, and about 8.5 wins at average, as a over under, which about 1.5 games better then UW's 7 wins at average, over, under.
Thats realistic ED.
Please work on your understanding
Ed, that 5 star QB: Was INCONSISTENT at another P5, and got BENCHED, before transfering to UW.
And he is a nonmoving, slow STATUE.
And the rest of the 4, 5 star QB's behind him, have FLOPPED, not developed, so if Eason doesnt get it done, its likely nobody else will. And its likely that Eason will not be bad or good but AVERAGE.
OL: Yes the OL is great
TE: Great
WR: NOT GOOD, AVERAGE, YOUNG, ETC
RB: YOUNG, EQUIVALENT TO DEON MC INTOSH OF WSU
DEFENSE: YOUNG, EVERYBODY IN PAC 12 SHOULD DESTROY UW's Defense.
So guess what ED, 1,2,3 bright spots, positions usually does not make up for about 3 bad spots, position, defense
Thats why UW win about 7 games as average, over/under.
I don't mind Mik saying that UW sucks and could only win 5 games. I just had to mess with him because he was so adamant that it was IMPOSSIBLE for it to happen at WSU. Dude tries to be logical and every once in a while, he gets caught up in some crazy loop where logic goes out the window and he just types 45 paragraphs to try and cover. There is an example above. I didn't even read it because I know that it's just a bunch of BS trying to cover his myopic viewpoint.
Agreed. This relates to an under-discussed aspect of Larry Scott's failings. By not working with a network partner for the past 8 years, in addition to all the other problems it created (massive startup costs, amateur-hour quality, major ongoing costs for a "media company," having to pay King Larry a bunch more than other conference commissioners, missing out on hundreds of millions so far in revenues, and terrible distribution), lacking a network partner has meant missing out on the non-stop promotion and talking up that other conferences that do have network partners get.
I hate to say it, but I think predictions for 7 or 8 wins (or fewer) for UW ignore their schedule. Unlike WSU, which has a pretty tough conference schedule this year, UW's is set up to let them win the Pac-12 North much more easily than they could without having all the big games at home.
Here it is:
EWU (home)
Cal (home)
Hawaii (home)
BYU (away)
USC (home)
Stanford (away)
Arizona (away)
Oregon (home)
Utah (home)
Oregon State (away)
Colorado (away)
WSU (home)
Every single big game for them (USC, Oregon, Utah, WSU) is at home, except maybe Stanford if you want to consider that a big game, and Stanford is one of the easiest road games in the conference. I can't see them losing more than 2 of those home games, and I wouldn't be surprised if they lose none.
All of the road games *should* be wins. They might lose one of them, but on paper, they should be favored in each.
I don't think they'll be as good as last year's team, but I think they'll win 9 games as a floor, unfortunately.
Just an interesting take that is all. Mike Leach has shown he reloads offensively every year. I am not sure what you wrote about Eason you could not have written about Minshew (except being a statue ) last fall before his first start.
Didn’t UW have their best defensive players graduate in 2015 leaving a ton of inexperience players yet the defense was better.
I hope Peterson struggles, I hope he doesn’t reload that defense like leach reloads the offense . I certainly hope we get them in Seattle this year .
I think the UW could almost semi probably loses to BYU, Oregon, Stanford, Utah, WSU.
And I think that UW, loses about, at least 3 out of those 5 possible, almost semi probable losses.
So 6,7,6.5 wins at minimum, 9, 10, 9.5 wins at maximum, 8 wins, at average, and their over/under.
I didnt know their schedule was going to be that easy.
Still I think WSU's over/under is going to be about .5 of 1 win, better then UW at minimum, 1 win better at average, 1.5 win better then UW, at best, as far as over/under goes.
UW is sure lucky to have such a easy schedule this season.
If their schedule was tougher, then UW would only win about 5,6, 5.5 games at minimum, 7 games at average, Over/Under, 8,9,8.5 wins at max.
This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And that was with a better Offense, QB, RB, OL, WR, etc, then this season, to go with that 2014 bad defense team that lost a bunch of NFL talent on defense.
So because of that this years UW team if not for their easy schedule, could do worse then 2014's 8-6 record, because of losing EVERYTHING AT DEFENSE, AND AT RB, WR, QB, ETC.
You didn’t bother to look at the scheduling with your “in depth analysis” of UW’s win:loss probability?
Mik gets so excited about the idea of proving how smart he is that he starts posting stuff before he looks at the whole picture. Gotta give him credit.....his words per post count dominates the competition. Of course, he also dominates in poor formatting, brevity, incoherent babble and ALL CAPS percentage. Nobody is gonna keep him down!
I appreciate his enthusiasm, his lack of facts and lazily researched (i.e.,nonexistent) seat-of-the-pants “analyses”...not so much.
