Who said the Pac-10 is a weak conference?

<p>So who watched #12 Cal just dominate #15 Tennessee 45-31? So their defense was a bit weak, but obviously TN's wasn't much to brag about, even in the "we're so tough" SEC conference. Can you say "DeSean for Heisman?"</p>

<p>LOL yeah that was ridiculous. Its always amazing to see that guy take a punt return, Tennessee kept it away from him after that first one. :)</p>

<p>Desean Jackson = LIKE UGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SON!</p>

<p>Jahvid Be(a)st is going to be absolutely ridiculous in one or two years.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Who said the Pac-10 is a weak conference? </p>

<hr>

<p>So who watched #12 Cal just dominate #15 Tennessee 45-31? So their defense was a bit weak, but obviously TN's wasn't much to brag about, even in the "we're so tough" SEC conference. Can you say "DeSean for Heisman?"

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, to be fair, I still think the SEC is a better overall conference than the Pac-10 is, top to bottom. Let's face it - there are some pretty mediocre teams in the Pac-10: i.e. Arizona, Stanford.</p>

<p>well, cal just demolished one of its top 3 teams, so I guess they're just THAT GOOD. dang son! and also, SC would beat LSU any day, so Pac-10 is better, IMO.</p>

<p>tennessee is definitely not one of the top 3 programs in the SEC</p>

<p>1.) Since when is 45-31 a demolition? It was a pretty competitive game. Hats off to Cal, played great.
2.) Tennessee isn't one of the top 3 teams in the SEC.
3.) SEC is still a much better conference, from top to bottom. Even Kentucky and Vanderbilt aren't bad (check out Kentucky's QB Andre Woodson this season).
4.) DeSean Jackson for Heisman? Maybe you haven't heard a tailback by the name of Darren McFadden out of Arkansas.</p>

<p>McFadden hadn't returned 6 punts for touchdowns last time I checked, nor was he part of the #1 receiving corps in the country. </p>

<p>Hopefully TN isn't one of the best teams that humiliation.</p>

<p>Since when WASN'T having 45 points scored on you and losing a demolition? That's the most points Tennessee has had scored on them in the last decade. Also, if Cal hadn't of fumbled the ball on the one with time running out, they would have lost by 21. </p>

<p>USC, Cal, and UCLA could beat LSU, Florida, and whoever you think is third any day, IMO. Pac-10 plays faster, smarter ball. And they have the coolest coaches. And their coaches don't talk ***** about other teams. Think the SEC learned their lesson this time though.</p>

<p>Kentucky? HUH? </p>

<p>Just so you know though, I DO respect your opinions, and realize that the SEC is a tough conference. I just think the Pac-10 is better this year, and it will show as USC will win the Nat'l Championship, Cal will win the Rose, and UCLA will win the Holiday Bowl.</p>

<p>DeSean for Heisman.</p>

<p>Is that even possible? Holiday bowl is for Pac-10 #2, so what happens when the number 2 goes off to the Rose Bowl?</p>

<p>That being said, I think if Tedford had wanted a blowout, he would've gotten it. The offense could've easily scored on the goalline, and they had like a minute left when they got the ball back. It could've easily been a 4 touchdown difference, but Tedford isn't that kind of person. In the holiday bowl last year, Tedford told the team to take a knee, but they ran it in for a TD instead and he got really ****ed. He was satisfied with winning 38-10.</p>

<p>SEC offense doesn't compare to Pac-10 offense, and the only reason SEC defense seems so good is because the teams they play have low-caliber offenses.</p>

<p>
[quote]
McFadden hadn't returned 6 punts for touchdowns last time I checked, nor was he part of the #1 receiving corps in the country.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, the counterpoint to that is that Jackson didn't come in 2nd in the Heisman voting last year, which McFadden did. Let's be honest. cFadden had already established his name last year and so has a significant media advantage this year. The winning of the Heisman has a lot to do with national media exposure. Fair or not fair, that's how it works. </p>

<p>
[quote]
USC, Cal, and UCLA could beat LSU, Florida, and whoever you think is third any day

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really? Any day?</p>

<p>First off, according to the AP rankings, the 3rd team in the SEC would be Georgia. While I suspect that USC coul beat LSU, I personally doubt that Cal could beat Florida or that UCLA could beat Georgia. The rankings bear this out, as Florida (#4) is ranked higher than Cal (#10) , and Georgia (#11) is ranked higher than UCLA (#13). On the other hand, Cal was ranked higher than Tennessee, as they were previously ranked #12 and 15 respectively, and Cal was playing at home, so Cal was SUPPOSED to win. It was not an upset. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Pac-10 plays faster, smarter ball.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really? Whatever kind of ball teams like Stanford or Arizona are playing, I'm not sure I would characterize it as 'fast' or 'smart'. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And they have the coolest coaches. And their coaches don't talk ***** about other teams.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really? They don't? Wasn't Stanford coach Jim Harbaugh disparaging his old alma mater (Michigan) when he said that the Michigan football team shunts its players to easier majors in order to maintain their eligibility (not that it helped against App State). </p>

<p>
[quote]
Kentucky? HUH?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Stanford? Arizona? Washington State? Huh? </p>

<p>
[quote]
Just so you know though, I DO respect your opinions, and realize that the SEC is a tough conference. I just think the Pac-10 is better this year, and it will show as USC will win the Nat'l Championship, Cal will win the Rose, and UCLA will win the Holiday Bowl.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Look, we all agree that the Pac-10 is a fine conference. But I have to agree with GatorEng when he says that the SEC is a stronger conference overall. Let's face it. While the top of the Pac-10 is strong, the weaker Pac-10 teams are pretty darn weak.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I'd like to see DeSean Jackson win the Heisman as much as anyone else, but the trophy is McFadden's to lose. Even if DeSean Jackson plays an amazing season (which I'm sure he will,) he still might not win the award. He's also got to compete with a slew of players with the type of stats and exposure (as sakky pointed out) that garner Heisman votes - Slaton, Brohm, Brennan, Booty, etc. </p>

<p>His PR against Tennessee was certainly a good start though to getting his name even more exposure.</p>

<p>Jackson probably won't win the Heisman bc Heisman voters still love giving the award to a traditional football program. A few years ago, Cal finished #4 in the polls, but was shut out of the Rose Bowl by Texas, which wasn't even from a traditional RB conference. Why? Because Texas football has a better name. True, Cal lost in the Holiday Bowl, which didn't exactly help their argument, but the point is that they weren't even given the chance.</p>

<p>"Stanford? Arizona? Washington State? Huh?"
^Arizona:
The football team was notably successful in the 1990s, under head coach Dick Tomey; his "Desert Swarm" defense was characterized by tough, hard-nosed tactics. In 1993, the team had its first 10-win season and beat the University of Miami Hurricanes in the Fiesta Bowl by a score of 29-0. It was the bowl game's only shutout in its then 23-year history. In 1998, the team posted a school-record 12-1 season and made the Holiday Bowl in which it defeated the Nebraska Cornhuskers. Arizona ended that season ranked 3rd nationally and 2nd in several publications. The 1998 Holiday Bowl was televised on ESPN and set the now-surpassed record of being the most watched of any bowl game in that network's history (the current record belongs to the 2005 Alamo Bowl between Michigan and Nebraska).</p>

<p>Stanford: </p>

<p>Wire National Titles 2 (1926, 1940)
Conference Titles 12
Heisman Winners 1
All-Americans 52</p>

<p>Washington State: Washington State has made 10 bowl appearances, and has a bowl record of 6-4. The Cougars have played in the Rose Bowl (1 win, 3 losses), the Holiday Bowl (1 win, 1 loss), the Aloha Bowl (1 win), the Copper Bowl (1 win), the Alamo Bowl (1 win), and the Sun Bowl (1 win).[1]</p>

<p>Kentucky:
The 1976 Wildcats retroactively claimed a share of the Southeastern Conference championship under coach Fran Curci via a loss later forfeited by Mississippi State (and despite losing at home to conference champion Georgia) and won the Peach Bowl, finishing #18 in the final AP poll. The 1977 Kentucky team went 10-1 and was undefeated in SEC play but, despite finishing the season ranked #6 in the AP poll, did not play in a bowl game due to NCAA sanctions. Kentucky finished at #6 and Penn State at #5 despite the fact that Kentucky defeated Penn State at Penn State during the regular season.
Coach Jerry Claiborne led the Wildcats to the 1983 Hall of Fame Bowl. In 1984 Kentucky returned to the Hall of Fame Bowl and defeated a ranked Wisconsin team to finish the season with a 9-3 record and a #19 ranking in the final AP poll.
The Wildcats played in the 1993 Peach Bowl under coach Bill Curry. Coach Hal Mumme led the Wildcats to the 1998 Outback Bowl and the 1999 Music City Bowl but the program was hit with severe sanctions for infractions during Mumme's tenure.
Under coach Guy Morriss the Wildcats posted a 7-5 record in 2002 but were not eligible for postseason play due to NCAA sanctions.
The team's current coach is Rich Brooks, who led the team to an 8-5 regular season record in 2006, including a memorable win over perennial SEC power University of Georgia, snapping a nine-game losing streak to the Bulldogs. Brooks has also led the football team to its first bowl game since 1999 and its first bowl game victory since 1984, as Kentucky defeated the Clemson University Tigers 28-20 in the Music City Bowl. [5]</p>

<p>Ok, so all this was taken from wikipedia. After all those stats, you still think Kentucky is good? Not exactly a great bowl history.</p>

<p>"really? They don't? Wasn't Stanford coach Jim Harbaugh disparaging his old alma mater (Michigan) when he said that the Michigan football team shunts its players to easier majors in order to maintain their eligibility (not that it helped against App State)."
^never heard about that one, so i'm assuming it wasn't plastered all over newspapers like it was when several of the SEC coaches considered the Pac-10 a "weak" conference. </p>

<p>"Is that even possible? Holiday bowl is for Pac-10 #2, so what happens when the number 2 goes off to the Rose Bowl?"
^Yes, it is. Let's assume SC goes to the National Championship. Next, let's say Cal only loses to SC and finishes 2nd in the Pac-10. Because their only loss was to SC, odds are they would still be BCS eligible. So they would act as the Pac-10 team represented in the Rose Bowl, while UCLA would also move up a spot, so to speak, and act as the 2nd place finisher for the Holiday Bowl. It's kinda complicated, but it could work.</p>

<p>"SEC offense doesn't compare to Pac-10 offense, and the only reason SEC defense seems so good is because the teams they play have low-caliber offenses."
^ I completely agree. Do you honestly think that SEC defenses would have stopped Reggie Bush had he played for Florida? They didn't stop DeSean Jackson, nor did they stop Justin Forsett. They are great within the context of their own environment (though, don't get me wrong, there are some excellent players there). I just think it's a little over-hyped and the arrogance surrounding that conference clearly portrays that.</p>

<p>sakky swoops in to put Berkeley in its place :) I knew that great one would show up, there was too much optimism in the thread. My sakky alert bracelet was going wild...</p>

<p>jackson doesn't have enough exposure. talk to a football fan on the east coast and mention jackson, they'll be like "who?"</p>

<p>brennan? puh-lease. only reason he puts up so many passing yards is:
1) he plays doodoo teams
2) every single play is a pass! in their last game, they didn't rush once until 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter. rushing runs down clock...incomplete passes don't. do they even have a running back? seems like every play is a 5 WR formation.
he wouldn't be putting up such stats if he played some good teams (no i don't consider boise state that great either)</p>

<p>
[quote]
My sakky alert bracelet was going wild...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Where do you buy those? I'd like one for myself...</p>

<p>vc08, for the record, I didn't mean to say that Kentucky is a good team. What I'm saying is that SEC's bottom feeders are better than any other conference's bottom feeders. That's what makes the SEC the strongest conference. Can the top teams of the Pac-10 compete with the top of the SEC? Sure. But that's not what determines the best overall conference.</p>

<p>And if you have some time, check out their QB (Kentucky), he's awesome (as in the best in the SEC, yes, better than Tebow and Stafford).</p>

<p>
[quote]
I completely agree. Do you honestly think that SEC defenses would have stopped Reggie Bush had he played for Florida? They didn't stop DeSean Jackson, nor did they stop Justin Forsett. They are great within the context of their own environment (though, don't get me wrong, there are some excellent players there). I just think it's a little over-hyped and the arrogance surrounding that conference clearly portrays that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Would they have completely stopped Bush? No. But would they have let him run all over them and have their asses on youtube being embarrassed for eternity? Not a chance. I'll put it this way. Look at Bush's best games, most were against the bottom feeders of the conference. He was still okay against better teams, but not even close to his performance against, for example, Fresno State. Take a look at McFadden's yards against Florida in the SEC championship. Florida did an excellent job in containing him and McFadden is more of a true running back than Bush (that's right!).</p>

<p>Love watching Best run . . .</p>

<p>I know, and he has the BEST last name lol....gator: Stanford is horrible, I agree, but Washington State, whom you considered a "bottom" team, just put up some major points against Wisconsin. The Pac-10 is known for upsets-any team could strike at any time. I have a lot of respect for the SEC-they do play very tough schedules. The style of play is simply different from the Pac-20, so it's a little hard to compare.</p>

<p>Bush was a better all-around player than McFadden, and I think few would argue against that. Though, I will agree that McFadden is a once-in-a-decade player with tremendous talent. You say Bush didn't show up big in big games, but perhaps then you don't recall the "Bush push" against Notre Dame a few years ago that propelled them to the top of college football. Maybe by the time McFadden graduates he will be better than Bush, but I think he's not quite there yet.</p>

<p>check this out, all you Cal fans. Oh baby!</p>

<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh9qExf_uM0&mode=related&search=%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh9qExf_uM0&mode=related&search=&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqawci9OSE0%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqawci9OSE0&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azzDXXsNUgo&mode=related&search=%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azzDXXsNUgo&mode=related&search=&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztu4OKCSSe8&mode=related&search=%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztu4OKCSSe8&mode=related&search=&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
^Arizona:
The football team was notably successful in the 1990s, under head coach Dick Tomey; his "Desert Swarm" defense was characterized by tough, hard-nosed tactics. In 1993, the team had its first 10-win season and beat the University of Miami Hurricanes in the Fiesta Bowl by a score of 29-0. It was the bowl game's only shutout in its then 23-year history. In 1998, the team posted a school-record 12-1 season and made the Holiday Bowl in which it defeated the Nebraska Cornhuskers. Arizona ended that season ranked 3rd nationally and 2nd in several publications. The 1998 Holiday Bowl was televised on ESPN and set the now-surpassed record of being the most watched of any bowl game in that network's history (the current record belongs to the 2005 Alamo Bowl between Michigan and Nebraska).</p>

<p>Stanford: </p>

<p>Wire National Titles 2 (1926, 1940)
Conference Titles 12
Heisman Winners 1
All-Americans 52</p>

<p>Washington State: Washington State has made 10 bowl appearances, and has a bowl record of 6-4. The Cougars have played in the Rose Bowl (1 win, 3 losses), the Holiday Bowl (1 win, 1 loss), the Aloha Bowl (1 win), the Copper Bowl (1 win), the Alamo Bowl (1 win), and the Sun Bowl (1 win).[1]</p>

<p>Kentucky:
The 1976 Wildcats retroactively claimed a share of the Southeastern Conference championship under coach Fran Curci via a loss later forfeited by Mississippi State (and despite losing at home to conference champion Georgia) and won the Peach Bowl, finishing #18 in the final AP poll. The 1977 Kentucky team went 10-1 and was undefeated in SEC play but, despite finishing the season ranked #6 in the AP poll, did not play in a bowl game due to NCAA sanctions. Kentucky finished at #6 and Penn State at #5 despite the fact that Kentucky defeated Penn State at Penn State during the regular season.
Coach Jerry Claiborne led the Wildcats to the 1983 Hall of Fame Bowl. In 1984 Kentucky returned to the Hall of Fame Bowl and defeated a ranked Wisconsin team to finish the season with a 9-3 record and a #19 ranking in the final AP poll.
The Wildcats played in the 1993 Peach Bowl under coach Bill Curry. Coach Hal Mumme led the Wildcats to the 1998 Outback Bowl and the 1999 Music City Bowl but the program was hit with severe sanctions for infractions during Mumme's tenure.
Under coach Guy Morriss the Wildcats posted a 7-5 record in 2002 but were not eligible for postseason play due to NCAA sanctions.
The team's current coach is Rich Brooks, who led the team to an 8-5 regular season record in 2006, including a memorable win over perennial SEC power University of Georgia, snapping a nine-game losing streak to the Bulldogs. Brooks has also led the football team to its first bowl game since 1999 and its first bowl game victory since 1984, as Kentucky defeated the Clemson University Tigers 28-20 in the Music City Bowl. [5]</p>

<p>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, what does this have to do with anything? We're not talking about how good particular conferences or schools were in the past. After all, Yale and Princeton each claim 24 national championships (of some kind), yet nobody cares about that now, as most of them were won in the 1800's. The National Championship Foundation has credited Harvard with 4 national championships since 1901 (1910, 1912,1913, 1919) - more than any school in the Pac-10 other than USC. And that doesn't even count the various championships that Harvard won before 1901. Does anybody care about that now? I don't think so. After all, I completely agree that today any team in the Pac-10 or the SEC, even Stanford, could beat Harvard in football. Yet if were to invoke history, we could say that the Ivy League was the best conference in the land. {Again, why not? Look at the number of national championships that Ivy League schools won in the old days}. </p>

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I-A_national_football_championship#By_year%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I-A_national_football_championship#By_year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
"really? They don't? Wasn't Stanford coach Jim Harbaugh disparaging his old alma mater (Michigan) when he said that the Michigan football team shunts its players to easier majors in order to maintain their eligibility (not that it helped against App State)."
^never heard about that one, so i'm assuming it wasn't plastered all over newspapers like it was when several of the SEC coaches considered the Pac-10 a "weak" conference.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, I think you need to do more reading. Here is some to whet your pallette.</p>

<p><a href="http://thewizardofodds.blogspot.com/2007/05/target-of-latest-harbaugh-rip-michigan.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://thewizardofodds.blogspot.com/2007/05/target-of-latest-harbaugh-rip-michigan.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?id=2966536&sportCat=ncf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?id=2966536&sportCat=ncf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070802/SPORTS0201/708020343/1131/SPORTS0201%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070802/SPORTS0201/708020343/1131/SPORTS0201&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>So, explain to me again your point about how Pac-10 coaches don't disparage other schools? Run that by me again?</p>