Going into the weekend, it looked like there wasn’t going to be a whole lot of excitement for these games, but a few of them did turn out to be decently interesting. Next week should be a lot better, though.
Rising:
UCLA: They bounce back from last week’s disaster. Chris Markey was fantastic.
Hovering:
Arizona: They showed signs of life against Cal.
Arizona St: This was a win against a team with a pulse, but there were plenty of issues exposed too.
USC: A decent win, but they’re supposed to win these games.
Cal: Ditto.
Oregon: Ditto.
Washington: They played well in defeat to the Bruins.
Stanford: Ditto.
Oregon St: Six turnovers, five of them picks, is a very bad sign of things to come.
Washington St: It’s at USC, so it’s certainly forgivable, but it was clear from the start who the better team was.
@ Arizona State (-11.5) 44, Oregon State 32
(my pick: @ Arizona St 45, Oregon St 7)
In the first quarter, it was all Beavers, as ASU opened by giving up a safety, then a touchdown, then a pick, then another touchdown and seemed to be ready to totally implode. However, after that last OS score the Sun Devils rebounded and seized control of the game, helped out by five Sean Canfield interceptions.
What to take from this:
If you’re Oregon St:
The good news is that even though the passing game clearly wasn’t working, and even though ASU was able to focus more on the run, Yvenson Bernard still had a good day. Moreover, the defense played pretty well, despite all the points allowed, as they had to fight lousy field position far too often to stem the tide.
However, Sean Canfield, if anything, was even worse than he was against Cincinnati. Five picks is totally inexcusable, but it really doesn’t seem like there’s a plan B (the other guy hasn’t looked at all good in his reps so far), which means that the Beavers are stuck with him until he learns not to throw it to the other guys. This could be the start of a sizable losing streak unless he plays a lot better in a big hurry.
If you’re Arizona St:
This was the best team the Sun Devils have had to face, and once again they showed that they are clearly the better team. They rebounded in the face of adversity, and turned an embarrassing blowout into a solid win. That said, the defense struggled too much at times, and the offense went really cold at times. When you need six turnovers to win by 12 points at home against a struggling team, things aren’t going well. They’ll need to play a lot better from now on, or they’re going to lose games like these instead of pulling them out.
@ UCLA (-6) 44, Washington 31
(my pick: @ UCLA 31, Washington 14)
This game was neck and neck throughout the first half, but in the third quarter UCLA jumped out to a two touchdown lead, and while the Huskies kept it interesting throughout, the Bruins were able to answer the bell every time U-Dub threatened, putting it away with a late kickoff return for a touchdown and ensuing field goal.
What to take from this:
If you’re Washington:
Once again, the Huskies simply didn’t have the talent to win this game against a better team. That said, they were competitive throughout, and Jake Locker has continued to improve. The next three games will be tough, but after that things ease up considerably. This could very easily be a bowl team, and could score a big upset or two if they can get the defense going a bit more over the next few weeks.
If you’re UCLA:
Simply winning this game is obviously a big emotional boost, but they still didn’t play all that well here. This was a home game against a lower-division Pac-10 team, and they never looked like they were really in control. Chris Markey played great, but that was about it, as the defense struggled against Locker, and the passing game was only OK. They need to really up the level of their play if they want to start a meaningful winning streak, because the easy part of their schedule is officially over.
Oregon (-17) 55, @ Stanford 31
(my pick: Oregon 31, @ Stanford 17)
In the first quarter, Oregon tore through Stanford, and it looked like the rout was on. However, in the second quarter the Cardinal bounced back, scoring four unanswered touchdowns and entered the locker room ahead. But in the second half it was all Ducks, as their offense simply couldn’t be stopped, while Stanford ended up hurting their own cause with untimely turnovers and failed fourth down conversions.
What to take from this:
If you’re Oregon:
Obviously, they’re a fantastically talented team, but they have to be a bit worried about how they seemed to take the whole second quarter off as a team. Here they got away with it, but next time they might not be so lucky.
If you’re Stanford:
They were competitive with a much more talented team until the defense wore down and the offense stopped making the key plays. It’s good that they were able to keep it close for a while, but they need to be able to keep it up in the second half, a problem that has dogged them in both of their losses so far.
@ USC (-25) 47, Washington St 14
(my pick: @ USC 38, Washington St 10)
USC came out and dominated the Cougars, pretty much from the first whistle. That was really the only story of the day.
What to take from this:
If you’re Washington St:
The Cougars need to just forget about this game. They got whipped by a fantastic team, and now they need to move on to the games where they’ve got a good shot of winning, which right now looks like everything other than road trips to Oregon and Cal. They should be fine, despite how they looked here.
If you’re USC:
They won and looked great doing so. They’ll have another few light tests against Washington, Stanford, Arizona and Notre Dame. It’ll only be afterwards that we’ll be able to see how good they really are.
@ Cal (-14) 45, Arizona 27
(my pick: @ Cal 28, Arizona 17)
In the first quarter Cal came out of the gate and flat-out took it to the Wildcats, tearing through their defense and shutting down their offense. However, after that U of A was able to rebound and make it a competitive game for a while, putting together a furious run in the third quarter and early fourth quarter before the Bears put it away for good on a late touchdown drive and subsequent fourth down stop.
What to take from this:
If you’re Arizona:
By and large, the defense played well, ignoring the early breakdowns. However, the offense had major issues, highlighted by a six-possession span (including halftime) where they had two picks, two fumbles, a turnover on downs, and just one touchdown. When the offense is as bad as that for as long as that, that’s going to usually be decisive, and it was in this game.
If you’re Cal:
It was good that they were able to do a lot of things well, but they have to be worried about how they let the Wildcats back into the game. They’ve done it against Tennesee, against Colorado State and now here. If they keep giving teams another shot, they’re eventually going to pay for it.
Pac-10 Games Record:
This Week: 5-0 SU, 3-2 ATS
Season: 27-5 SU, 16-14 ATS
National Games of the Week:
@ LSU (-18) 28, South Carolina 16
(my pick: @ LSU 24, South Carolina 17)
Georgia 26, @ Alabama (-3.5) 23 (OT)
(my pick: @ Alabama 24, Georgia 21)
National Games Record:
This Week: 1-1 SU, 2-0 ATS
Season: 7-6 SU, 7-6 ATS
Bad Lines
Duke +14
Covered by 11 points.
Georgia Tech -3.5
Missed by 8.5 points and outright upset.
Pitt -9.5
Missed by 29.5 points and outright upset.
Tenn -20
Covered by 1 point.
Syracuse +36.5
Covered by 39.5 points and outright upset.
Air Force +11.5
Missed by 13.5 points.
Ole Miss +23
Covered by 17 points.
Bad Lines Record
This week: 4-3
Season: 7-6
My Top 25:
1) LSU (4-0): vs SCar: W 28-16
Carolina is good, but the #1 team at home should still do a bit better. The gap has largely closed between the Tigers and the next two.
2) Oklahoma (4-0): @ Tulsa W 62-21
They continue to play great, but they continue to not have much competition.
3) USC (3-0): vs WSU: W 47-14
USC is still a great team, but they just haven’t done quite as much as the two above them.
4) Florida (4-0): @ Ole Miss: W 30-24
5) WV (4-0): vs ECU: W 48-7
As far as I’m concerned, these two are neck and neck.
6) Ohio St (4-0): vs NW: W 58-7
They’re rolling again, and if they can keep it up, they’ve got a shot at moving upwards as time goes on.
7) Oregon (4-0): @ Stan: W 55-31
8) BC (4-0): vs Army: W 37-17
Two very solid teams with two merely okay performances this week.
9) Cal (4-0): vs Ariz: W 45-27
10) South Carolina (3-1): @ LSU: L 16-28
How can I dock this team for playing my #1 closely on the road, especially when the Georgia win just got a lot better?
11) Kentucky (4-0): @ Ark: W 42-29
The Louisville win suddenly doesn’t mean much, but they’re still undefeated, and the road win at Arkansas helps the resume a good deal.
12) Texas (4-0): vs Rice: W 58-14
They’re starting to play a bit better, but they still lack a legitimately good win, and they still have those close losses on the slate.
13) Georgia (3-1): @ Bama: W 26-23 (OT)
14) USF (3-0): vs UNC: W 37-10
15) Cincinnati (4-0): vs Marshall: W 40-14
16) Wisconsin (4-0): vs Iowa: W 17-13
Another lackluster win for the Badgers. Either they play better and earn their way back up, or they’re going to lose at least once (and probably convincingly) in the next three weeks.
17) Arizona St (4-0): vs OS: W 44-32
18) Michigan State (4-0): @ ND: W 31-14
I was probably a week late including the Spartans on the list.
19) Alabama (3-1): vs UGA: L 23-26 (OT)
20) Rutgers (3-0): BYE
21) Clemson (4-0): @ NCSt: W 42-20
22) Purdue (4-0): @ Minn: W 45-31
23) Penn St (3-1): @ Mich: L 9-14
This isn’t that bad of a loss, but they need to improve their play or Illinois will beat them next week.
24) Hawaii (4-0): vs AA: W 66-10
25) Missouri (4-0): vs AA: W 38-17
The last two are basically by default, since there just isn’t anyone else who’s done much to make it on the list.
Dropped Out:
13) Georgia Tech
16) Texas A&M
23) Louisville
24) Air Force
On the Cusp:
Miami, Kansas, UCLA, Virginia Tech,
Last Week:
1) LSU (3-0):
2) Oklahoma (3-0):
3) USC (2-0):
4) Florida (3-0):
5) WV (3-0):
6) Ohio St (3-0):
7) Oregon (3-0):
8) BC (3-0):
9) Penn St (3-0):
10) South Carolina (3-0):
11) Cal (3-0):
12) Texas (3-0):
13) Georgia Tech (2-1):
14) Georgia (2-1):
15) USF (2-0):
16) Texas A&M (3-0):
17) Alabama (3-0):
18) Wisconsin (3-0):
19) Cincinnati (3-0):
20) Rutgers (3-0):
21) Arizona St (3-0):
22) Kentucky (3-0):
23) Louisville (2-1):
24) Air Force (3-0):
25) Clemson (3-0):
Soapbox Moment #1:
By now everyone has heard about Oklahoma State coach Mike Gundy and his rant after the Cowboys’ win against Texas Tech, where he tore into the columnist who had been writing about his (benched) quarterback. And what’s really interesting is to see how it seems like just about everyone has taken strong sides in the matter. Either the journalist was perfectly in her rights to write what she did and Gundy should be disciplined and/or fired (see: Dodd) or Gundy was perfectly in his rights to blast away at the things she wrote (no specific columnist but this opinion is pretty popular on a lot of boards). So which one is it?
Actually, it’s neither. She was NOT in her rights to write what she did, and he was NOT in his rights to blast away at her afterwards. The easy one to address is Gundy. It was pretty obvious that he went over the top during his press conference. He made unsubstantiated claims about the accuracy of the paper and the writer, and he made unwarranted personal attacks against the writer. It was an obvious breach of decorum, and it was uncalled for.
That said, it’s incredibly difficult to feel even the smallest amount of sympathy for this writer. She wrote an extremely mean-spirited column against the quarterback, which is grossly inappropriate under any circumstances. It’s one thing to report that the coaching staff has problems with his attitude (I have no idea if it’s true, and I really don’t care), but it’s something else entirely for her to intentionally and repeatedly mock him.
This is, after all, someone who doesn’t get a salary, doesn’t get lasting glory, and probably won’t be doing this for a living. That means that, at the very least, he deserves to be above public mockery unless he actually does something to merit it (like, for instance, committing a crime, or starting a brawl, or flipping off other fans, or things like that).
Choosing not to play through an injury most certainly does not qualify for that list. Indeed, to demand that anyone play through pain when they’re not getting paid for it (and perhaps even when they are) is flat-out unconscionable. Playing through pain can be “toughness” when it’s extremely minor pain, but it can easily be a health risk even when it’s something small. It’s obscene to demand that of a college kid, and it’s even worse to openly mock him when he fails to meet that despicable standard.
And then, to top it off, the reporter goes around declaring that Gundy has “attacked her credibility.” Sure, he may have attacked that too, but that wasn’t the point, and pretending it was is nothing short of dishonest. He was attacking her integrity. It wasn’t a matter of whether the facts were correct, it was a matter of whether a decent human being would have written that article to begin with, even if every single fact was 100% accurate. His answer was no. And so is mine.
Soapbox Moment #2:
Once again the polls leave me breathless with their stupidity. What’s this week’s culprit? Take a look at South Carolina. They played at LSU, in a game where:
1) LSU ran a fake field goal for a touchdown
2) Carolina twice failed on fourth down conversions (one of which they had converted but was taken back due to a playclock malfunction)
3) Their starting QB got hurt
4) They had to play a big chunk of the game in the rain (clearly an advantage for LSU, since the Tigers ran it well and Carolina didn’t)
5) They dropped an easy pick six
So despite fighting the home-field advantage, the weather, the crowd, and about all of the big plays going the other way, the Gamecocks still made it a game late, and in the end only lost by 12 to arguably the best team in the country.
So what did the coaches’ poll do? They took Carolina (already underranked at #14) and dropped them like a stone to #21, below such luminaries as Georgia (who they beat on the road, although the Bulldogs' wins at least build a reasonable case), and Virginia Tech (who LSU slaughtered and who still hasn’t beat anyone decent).
Is this reasonable? Is there any justification whatsoever why they deserve to be so low, and especially why anyone, let alone a majority, should vote those two teams ahead of the Gamecocks?
The clear answer is no. There is no reasonable justification for why this happened. The fact is, these votes happened not because of what these teams deserve, but rather because of the typical arbitrary, foolish and lazy standards that the voters keep using week after week, year after year.
What are these standards? First and foremost is what I call the “last week factor.” Voters will put a team not where they ought to be, but rather right around where they were the last week, and will for the most part only adjust downwards after a loss, unless a team is especially impressive in their wins.
The other relevant factor is the “when did they lose factor.” This plays into how Virginia Tech was ranked not only above SC, but also above every single other team with a loss, despite not doing a single thing of note all year long.
For the truly lazy voter, it doesn’t matter how badly the Hokies got killed by LSU and how well SC played against the Tigers. The only thing that matters is that Virginia Tech lost first. Thus, they get ranked above Georgia (who at least killed OK State, beat Bama on the road and gave SC a game), Penn State (who at least killed Notre Dame and gave Michigan a game), and of course South Carolina.
And the fact remains that there are far too many lazy voters in this process. Until and unless people pay the attention that is due, and until and unless people start to hold people accountable for the same stupid voting patterns that they always do, this will continue without end. And even if you don’t care about South Carolina (I personally don’t), if you accept what happened here, then eventually it’ll be your team who gets hosed by this process, and it may be at a time when it actually matters, instead of just at the end of September.
Questions, comments or suggestions? Email me at cfn_ms@hotmail.com
