In this college football championship season

[How_did_this_happen?]

I'm reflecting back on our 1997 season since I like living in the past.

It amazing to think just how close we were to being crowned the mythical national champion that season.

With the new playoff structure and the rise of the SEC and now even the ACC, we won't see that opportunity again. Sorry for the pessimism. Like I said last night, only USC and perhaps Furd could win it all in the future. Maybe Oregon too. Not seeing anyone else winning it all from the Pac12. The college football landscape has changed. The ABC and SEC will dominate going forward with Ohio State and Michigan thrown into the mix.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

I'm reflecting back on our 1997 season since I like living in the past.

It amazing to think just how close we were to being crowned the mythical national champion that season.

With the new playoff structure and the rise of the SEC and now even the ACC, we won't see that opportunity again. Sorry for the pessimism. Like I said last night, only USC and perhaps Furd could win it all in the future. Maybe Oregon too. Not seeing anyone else winning it all from the Pac12. The college football landscape has changed. The ABC and SEC will dominate going forward with Ohio State and Michigan thrown into the mix.

Until the committee actually abides by their own rules, it's going to be a mess. If the CFP keeping four teams, winning your conference champions should be a huge deal.

 

[HHusky]

I'm reflecting back on our 1997 season since I like living in the past.

It amazing to think just how close we were to being crowned the mythical national champion that season.

With the new playoff structure and the rise of the SEC and now even the ACC, we won't see that opportunity again. Sorry for the pessimism. Like I said last night, only USC and perhaps Furd could win it all in the future. Maybe Oregon too. Not seeing anyone else winning it all from the Pac12. The college football landscape has changed. The ABC and SEC will dominate going forward with Ohio State and Michigan thrown into the mix.

I'm reflecting back on our 1997 season since I like living in the past.

It amazing to think just how close we were to being crowned the mythical national champion that season.

With the new playoff structure and the rise of the SEC and now even the ACC, we won't see that opportunity again. Sorry for the pessimism. Like I said last night, only USC and perhaps Furd could win it all in the future. Maybe Oregon too. Not seeing anyone else winning it all from the Pac12. The college football landscape has changed. The ABC and SEC will dominate going forward with Ohio State and Michigan thrown into the mix.

It's far from obvious why only USC and Stanford would be up to the task. And if you had to name only one more, Oregon wouldn't be that one. Clearly Cal, UCLA and Washington have greater advantages.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

It's far from obvious why only USC and Stanford would be up to the task. And if you had to name only one more, Oregon wouldn't be that one. Clearly Cal, UCLA and Washington have greater advantages.

I added Oregon because I think with Mr. Nike, they are committed more than the other schools to get a title (excluding USC). Cal hasn't shown that commitment. Neither has UCLA (they are a basketball school). I can see an argument for UW, but will upper campus pound your program down again?

 

[HHusky]

I added Oregon because I think with Mr. Nike, they are committed more than the other schools to get a title (excluding USC). Cal hasn't shown that commitment. Neither has UCLA (they are a basketball school). I can see an argument for UW, but will upper campus pound your program down again?

I added Oregon because I think with Mr. Nike, they are committed more than the other schools to get a title (excluding USC). Cal hasn't shown that commitment. Neither has UCLA (they are a basketball school). I can see an argument for UW, but will upper campus pound your program down again?

Knight is a generous donor, but UCLA, Cal and Washington all have broader and deeper donor bases. Nothing about the commitment level has to remain constant. The Bruins and Bears have made some bad hires. USC had a run of those too a few years ago. It doesn't take long for the right hire to turn things around.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Knight is a generous donor, but UCLA, Cal and Washington all have broader and deeper donor bases. Nothing about the commitment level has to remain constant. The Bruins and Bears have made some bad hires. USC had a run of those too a few years ago. It doesn't take long for the right hire to turn things around.

You have a valid point. It seems like Cal for so many years has been mediocre with so many obvious advantages.

 

[HHusky]

You have a valid point. It seems like Cal for so many years has been mediocre with so many obvious advantages.

They just made a huge investment in facilities. I don't think Dykes is the right guy and I don't think he'll keep his job absent a big turnaround in 2017.

 

[BiggsCoug]

UCLA..... Worst job in the PAC 12? Or is it Cal???

 

[SCglory]

It's far from obvious why only USC and Stanford would be up to the task. And if you had to name only one more, Oregon wouldn't be that one. Clearly Cal, UCLA and Washington have greater advantages.

1. I think the 8 team playoff will be upon us rather soon. That is a good thing and will change things for the better, as far as selection goes.
2. I cannot agree with your "analysis" (of the prospects of Cal, Ucla, Huskies, and Oregon). Money rules, esp. in public schools where the school has to take a broader view of "constituencies" to consider. The "Knight End Around" has allowed a VERY poor ($$) school like Oregon to leap-frog other such schools, and as long as the Nike pipeline remains secure they will always be dangerous. In all the ways that matter, Phil Knight IS an endowment at UO. Cal?? Not sure why you mentioned them at all....typo? They have not won the conference in ages, and show no signs of taking the next step. Ucla? Perennial underachievers.....Huskies have a nice, Perfect Storm of talent and coaching now so they will be good for the near future. It makes the Oregon & Washington rivalry meaningful again. But make no mistake: Oregon's money and the way it comes in makes them able to turn on a dime, faster than U-dub and with more resources.

 

[HHusky]

1. I think the 8 team playoff will be upon us rather soon. That is a good thing and will change things for the better, as far as selection goes.
2. I cannot agree with your "analysis" (of the prospects of Cal, Ucla, Huskies, and Oregon). Money rules, esp. in public schools where the school has to take a broader view of "constituencies" to consider. The "Knight End Around" has allowed a VERY poor ($$) school like Oregon to leap-frog other such schools, and as long as the Nike pipeline remains secure they will always be dangerous. In all the ways that matter, Phil Knight IS an endowment at UO. Cal?? Not sure why you mentioned them at all....typo? They have not won the conference in ages, and show no signs of taking the next step. Ucla? Perennial underachievers.....Huskies have a nice, Perfect Storm of talent and coaching now so they will be good for the near future. It makes the Oregon & Washington rivalry meaningful again. But make no mistake: Oregon's money and the way it comes in makes them able to turn on a dime, faster than U-dub and with more resources.

Nobody would be talking about Stanford as some bully boy team 10 years ago. It's 2000 Rose Bowl team was an abberation for a program that otherwise hadn't done much since 1971. Its recent success began in about 2009. It's not obvious that Stanford should be a football power, or that it will remain one.

Cal has had some bad luck. For example, one of its best teams was during the 1991 season. It has made bad hires. But it has huge advantages in population, wealth, tradition and stature over Oregon. Whether Cal chooses to pursue football greatness is the only issue. Maybe losing repeatedly to Stanford will be a motivator. They hate that.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Nobody would be talking about Stanford as some bully boy team 10 years ago. It's 2000 Rose Bowl team was an abberation for a program that otherwise hadn't done much since 1971. Its recent success began in about 2009. It's not obvious that Stanford should be a football power.

Cal has had some bad luck. For example, one of its best teams was during the 1991 season. It has made bad hires. But it has huge advantages in population, wealth, tradition and stature over Oregon. Whether Cal chooses to pursue football greatness is the only issue. Maybe losing repeatedly to Stanford will be a motivator. They hate that.

Cal has chosen their bad luck. Whatever advantages they have in the Bay Area population are washed away by having higher admission standards. And it's ok to be a higher academic school. They need to do a better job of recruiting nationwide.

Also, I get the feeling that the athletics and academics at Cal are not on the same page. One working against each other or at odds...

The Northwest schools should be pillaging the Northern Cal talent.

 

[HHusky]

Cal has chosen their bad luck. Whatever advantages they have in the Bay Area population are washed away by having higher admission standards. And it's ok to be a higher academic school. They need to do a better job of recruiting nationwide.

Also, I get the feeling that the athletics and academics at Cal are not on the same page. One working against each other or at odds...

The Northwest schools should be pillaging the Northern Cal talent.

Cal's admission standards for athletes aren't so high it can't compete. Neuheisel bitched about Cal taking kids he couldn't get admitted to UCLA. They need the right coach and AD.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Cal's admission standards for athletes aren't so high it can't compete. Neuheisel bitched about Cal taking kids he couldn't get admitted to UCLA. They need the right coach and AD.

I think having the right people in place and putting $$$ into the program is more important then location and facilities.

 

[YakiCoug]

1. I think the 8 team playoff will be upon us rather soon. That is a good thing and will change things for the better, as far as selection goes.
2. I cannot agree with your "analysis" (of the prospects of Cal, Ucla, Huskies, and Oregon). Money rules, esp. in public schools where the school has to take a broader view of "constituencies" to consider. The "Knight End Around" has allowed a VERY poor ($$) school like Oregon to leap-frog other such schools, and as long as the Nike pipeline remains secure they will always be dangerous. In all the ways that matter, Phil Knight IS an endowment at UO. Cal?? Not sure why you mentioned them at all....typo? They have not won the conference in ages, and show no signs of taking the next step. Ucla? Perennial underachievers.....Huskies have a nice, Perfect Storm of talent and coaching now so they will be good for the near future. It makes the Oregon & Washington rivalry meaningful again. But make no mistake: Oregon's money and the way it comes in makes them able to turn on a dime, faster than U-dub and with more resources.

The pooches had their advantages in place throughout their 12-game losing streak to Oregon. The quacks aren't far away from resuming their dominance of UW.

 

[HHusky]

The pooches had their advantages in place throughout their 12-game losing streak to Oregon. The quacks aren't far away from resuming their dominance of UW.

Not far away at all . . . in geological time.

Vicarious Duck thrill?

 

[CougPatrol]

Actually, i predict that SE Washington will become the world leader in grape production, just as we are in lentils. WSU will soon become NIKE north, thanks to the billions of dollars that will be donated by our wealthy agronomy boosters.

 

[HHusky]

Actually, i predict that SE Washington will become the world leader in grape production, just as we are in lentils. WSU will soon become NIKE north, thanks to the billions of dollars that will be donated by our wealthy agronomy boosters.

Don't forget Yakima hops.

 

[kougkurt]

Don't forget Yakima hops.

Cmon Know your geography. Yakima hops production is low.

 

[HHusky]

Cmon Know your geography. Yakima hops production is low.

Aren't they still the best though?