Observation on visibility

[Geoduck12]

Reading the ESPN PAC12 blog and listening to the commentators yesterday for the Duck spring game an emerging topic that is being discussed is how, or will, the bottom teams in the conference improve and become competitive. They each have mentioned 4 programs WSU, OSU, CU and Cal.

They have discussed where 3 of those programs were, are and where they see them going, there was one program that was not detailed in any of those discussions, guess which one.

Whether it's apathy, visibility or lack of a program buzz seems like this program is now a nonfactor in conference discussions. That is not a good thing.

 

[chinookpirate]

so... you're saying we're *not* competing against Paul Wulff???

 

[YakiCoug]

so... you're saying we're *not* competing against Paul Wulff???

Once again, you bring nothing to the table other than an attempt to steer yet another thread into a Wulffian abyss. Keep it up. Your days here are numbered.
As for the original post here, the media typically suggest the northern division is down because of the Ducks' unknowns (life without Mariota and a few top defenders). In the same breath, they ignore UCLA's and ASU's loss of their starting QBs, although the Sun Devil's Bercovici got valuable playing time when the starter was injured. Jalen Strong is gone, so newcomers will have to emerge. They ballyhoo USC's Kessler but ignore the loss of their top running back, wide receiver, and its two top defenders. Leonard Williams was the best d-lineman the conference has seen in the past 25 years. USC, however, is back to bringing in 5- and 4-stars in bunches, so the Trojans arguably will survive if not thrive in the south.
As for the Pac-12 north, Oregon will be the favorite until someone knocks them off. WSU nearly blew up the league's national title prospects last year in Pullman, and Oregon struggled in two other games WITH Mariota. So, it's going to be interesting.

 

[425cougfan]

Reading the ESPN PAC12 blog and listening to the commentators yesterday for the Duck spring game an emerging topic that is being discussed is how, or will, the bottom teams in the conference improve and become competitive. They each have mentioned 4 programs WSU, OSU, CU and Cal.

They have discussed where 3 of those programs were, are and where they see them going, there was one program that was not detailed in any of those discussions, guess which one.

Whether it's apathy, visibility or lack of a program buzz seems like this program is now a nonfactor in conference discussions. That is not a good thing.

I read that same article on the Pac-12 blog. Remember that it's just a blog post by one ESPN reporter. They had some discussion of WSU in there -- some quotes from Leach -- and probably felt that was enough. The discussion was highly superficial for each team.

Honestly, from an outsider's perspective, WSU is the least "interesting" of those four teams right now (which is different from saying it's the least likely to improve greatly):

- Cal missed a bowl by one game and played really well at times last year, and has a top QB coming back.
- CU has been the consensus disaster in the conference for several years. Any signs of life from that program are of interest.
- OS has a new coaching staff.
- WSU has a (relatively) stable staff, likely will start a QB who played in almost half the team's games last year, and there haven't been any major news stories in the offseason. Not a ton to say, really, which (again) is different from saying it's not in a position to keep improving.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

For me personally, the most interesting 2015 PAC football stories other than my Cougs (which is always the most interesting story to me) are UW and Utah. UW had 4 defensive kids taken in the first 2 rounds, so clearly they had talent. Yet when you look at last season's defensive statistics, they were so-so. Good on run defense, bad on pass defense. Pretty good on points allowed (helped by turnover margin), middle of the league overall. That was with 4 guys that went in the first 2 rounds. You have to wonder how effectively the coaching & scheme took advantage of those players. I have to assume that their D will be worse this year, if for no other reason than the 4 top players moving on…and the D coaching has not given any real reason for optimism. As for Utah, I've never seen the sort of soap opera play out between a HC and an AD that Utah has experienced through the past year. Again, I think you would have to assume that the team as a whole will be down this year.

 

[SaveFerris]

For me personally, the most interesting 2015 PAC football stories other than my Cougs (which is always the most interesting story to me) are UW and Utah. UW had 4 defensive kids taken in the first 2 rounds, so clearly they had talent. Yet when you look at last season's defensive statistics, they were so-so. Good on run defense, bad on pass defense. Pretty good on points allowed (helped by turnover margin), middle of the league overall. That was with 4 guys that went in the first 2 rounds. You have to wonder how effectively the coaching & scheme took advantage of those players. I have to assume that their D will be worse this year, if for no other reason than the 4 top players moving on…and the D coaching has not given any real reason for optimism. As for Utah, I've never seen the sort of soap opera play out between a HC and an AD that Utah has experienced through the past year. Again, I think you would have to assume that the team as a whole will be down this year.

Hard to believe they weren't better with that kind of talent plus they also lose a pretty good LB in John Timu (signed as an UDFA by someone).

 

[wazzubruce]

I read the article also and found the slight. However each of the explanations above make sense. Nothing really big happening at Pullman.... doesn't mean Cougs can't surprise!