<p>Longshore has absolutely no leadership skills to carry the team. He's too interested in what color he'll dye his hair week in and week out.</p>
<p>Riley is a much better QB because he's MOBILE! Even when Longshore was healthy, mobility was a weakness for him.</p>
<p>Berkeley tree huggers win first round against the High Performance Student Athlete Center:
Inside</a> Bay Area - Judge rejects Berkeley's claim in tree-sitting case Order favors backers of oaks</p>
<p>Fortunately, Judge Miller allowed Cal to submit expert testimony to the contrary. Unfortunately, this could delay final decision till early February.</p>
<p><em>Sigh</em> We'll continue to wait patiently I guess...almost 1.5 years delayed...How long will Tedford remain patient?</p>
<p>
[Quote]
He's too interested in what color he'll dye his hair week in and week out.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>haha, that's like verbadum what my dad said.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
How long will Tedford remain patient?
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>probably not more than 1 or 2 more seasons, if nothing gets done</p>
<p>
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, now that the season is all over and the final poll has been issued, we can now summarize whether how the Pac-10 really did match up (which was the impetus for this thread in the first place).</p>
<p>And, unfortunately, the data doesn't look good. The Pac-10 merited only 4 teams in the top 25 (#3 USC, #16 ASU, #23 Oregon, and #25 Oregon State), as compared to the SEC, which not only had the national champion LSU, but also #2 Georgia, #12 Tennessee, #13 Florida, and #15 Auburn, with 3 other teams (Kentucky, Arkansas, and Miss State) receiving votes. I think there can be little dispute that the SEC was clearly the dominant conference this season.</p>
<p>On the bright side, I would say that the Pac-10 seemed to have done better than the Big East and may have edged out the Big 10 (although that is debatable). </p>
<p>The major disappointments of the Pac-10 were, sadly, Cal, which was supposed to contend for the BCS this year but unfortunately fell far short (couldn't even beat Stanford, darn it). UCLA was also a major disappointment. ASU on the other hand exceeded expectations, despite losing 3 of their last 5. </p>
<p>I hope that Cal has a better showing next season. At the very least, I hope they beat Stanford.</p>
<p>It's January 15, which I believe is the last day for underclassmen to declare for the NFL Draft. </p>
<p>I know that it's wishful thinking, but I'm still holding out hope for Desean Jackson to return for his senior season. Every projection and mock draft I've seen has him going in the mid-to-late first round though, so he really doesn't have any reason to stay.</p>
<p>oh well...it's been a good three years with djax...let's just hope calvin, ross, et al. will step it up next year.</p>
<p>^ At least center Alex Mack is returning for his senior season. He's the bedrock of the team.</p>
<p>sakky: this is true, but also remember that without injuries to Longshore and Dixon, you're talking about 2 legit title teams. SEC was hardly plagued by injuries at all, while UCLA, USC, Cal, and Oregon all lost their starting QBs for 2+ games.</p>
<p>and typical jackson...wait til the last minute only to spurn somebody.</p>
<p>
[quote]
SEC was hardly plagued by injuries at all,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, I don't know about that. LSU in particular, won the national championship despite being struck by the wrath of God. </p>
<p>So I don't see injuries as being an excuse. Sure, some Pac-10 teams suffered QB injuries But so did LSU: Flynn was hurt since the 2nd game of the season against Virginia Tech and didn't even play at all in the SEC Championship Game. LSU had to resort to utilizing both Flynn and backup Ryan Perrilloux for most of the season, and Perrilloux had to play (and win) the entire SEC championship game. In fact, Perrilloux arguably played better than Flynn did during the season.</p>
<p>The takehome point is that strong teams can suffer injuries and find ways to win anyway. If nothing else, it means that Pac-10 teams need to get better backup QB's. Or, they need to become less reliant on strong QB play. If you choose not to do that, and your starting QB goes down, hey, it's hard for me to sympathize with you. Get a better backup. Or, get a more flexible gameplan. </p>
<p>Furthermore I don't know that not having good backup QB's is that much of a problem anyway. Take Cal. Riley may actually be a better QB than Longshore is. Now, of course, that's difficult to say for sure because Riley didn't get a lot of playing time. But when he did, frankly, he looked better than Longshore did. Hence, I don't know that you can really blame Cal's problems on QB injuries. Similarly, as far as UCLA was concerned, Cowan seemed to be just as good as Olson. USC? Mark Sanchez seemed to be just as good as Booty. The one that I could perhaps agree with is Oregon, where Roper, who actually played pretty well (i.e. 4 TD's, 0 Int in the Sun Bowl), clearly could not equal the play of Dixon. But that just means that Oregon needs to be less reliant on their QB. For example, when Flynn was suffering from injury problems, LSU began to rely on other parts of their team (notably, their defense). That's what you need to do if you want to win a championship.</p>