CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

Okay, below I'm posting a response I gave in another thread; but doing so here, as it had little to do with the overall discussion of that topic, and to prevent excessive comments to scavenge through.

>

Stanford lost to Oregon, who, even though they are a 2 loss team, beat Stanford outright, head-to-head. Oregon's other loss, was to non-conference opponent, LSU.

So, unless Oregon loses to Oregon St in the Civil War game; the Ducks will fill the pac-12 north spot in the Conference title game.

USC is ineligible to play in post season competition this year. And so, they cannot appear in the pac-12 Championship.

Arizona St was considered the team headed for the game; however, with their string of three straight losses to UCLA, Washington State, and Arizona this past weekend, dropped them to 4-4 in-conference, and eliminating them from the conversation.

Silly as this may look, here's the skinny:

PAC 12 SOUTH Conference Records
USC 6-2
UCLA 5-3
Utah 4-4
Arizona State 4-4
Arizona 2-7
Colorado 1-7

USC is out, so, with a win over the Trojans, UCLA would be @ 6-3 in-conference, giving them the Championship game.

Utah is right there behind them @ 4-4, and plays Colorado this week. The Utes beat UCLA in head-to-head competition. Meaning, if UCLA loses to USC (which is likely), and if Utah wins against Colorado (which is also likely), would put both the Utes & the Bruins @ 5-4 in-conference; then Utah will appear in the pac-12 title game.

As badly as Utah seemed to be from the beginning of the year. They have the best shot of going to the inaugural pac-12 Championship game.

Of course, there is always that proverbial, "why we play the game" annotation. And thus, ever being unlikely, Colorado could somehow beat Utah. Or UCLA could somehow win vs rival USC. Which brings forth another cliche`, "the season's not over yet".

>

Now, with regards to that reply; Utah did in fact lose today. And thus, regardless of what happens in the Battle for LA tomorrow, because of USC's default of not being eligible, UCLA will be in the Pac-12 South representative in the first Pac-12 title game.

The North division will be settled tomorrow yet, after the Oregon/Oregon St Civil War game.

Should Oregon win; they will play UCLA for the Pac-12 Championship.
If the Ducks lose; Stanford will play for the conference title.

Stanford, win or lose tomorrow, will have no determining element on the Pac-12 title, as they play Notre Dame in a non-conference match up.

.

.

.

I think UCLA will lose tomorrow and finish 5-4 in conference. Losing USC to the postseason ban really hurts the Pac-12 here. They only have three good teams this year and USC is definitely the only one in the South. I was really surprised that Utah got beat today, but that's what happens when you have a team with nothing to lose and players playing the last games of their careers (in the case of the Colorado seniors). It didn't help that their kicker missed that chip-shot in the 3rd though (and the other two FGs).

There's no way Arizona State should have blown this division. Losing to Washington State was the backbreaker.

UCLA wining that division is the commentary on the insanity of this all. The PAC whatever it is, is weaker than my resolve at the Thanksgiving day dinner table.

donovan wrote:UCLA wining that division is the commentary on the insanity of this all. The PAC whatever it is, is weaker than my resolve at the Thanksgiving day dinner table.

Or at a Portland Steak House.

Well, with Oregon's dismantling of the Beavers today; we have our Pac-12 answers.

The first ever Pac-12 Conference Title game will be:

Oregon vs. UCLA

.

I wonder how USC feels; that is, should the Trojans beat the the Bruins tonight, USC will have beaten both teams who will be playing for the Pac-Championship.

.

.

.

Derek wrote:

donovan wrote:UCLA wining that division is the commentary on the insanity of this all. The PAC whatever it is, is weaker than my resolve at the Thanksgiving day dinner table.

Or at a Portland Steak House.

And you said you wouldn't tell....that was very good...but my goodness I am indebted to you. Good job today, Coach...next week...well the pundits will be spinning with a one loss LSU

As for the OSU UO game...it was good weather and well....the weather was good. OSU is so baaaaaaaaaaaad.

donovan wrote:

Derek wrote:

donovan wrote:UCLA wining that division is the commentary on the insanity of this all. The PAC whatever it is, is weaker than my resolve at the Thanksgiving day dinner table.

Or at a Portland Steak House.

And you said you wouldn't tell....that was very good...but my goodness I am indebted to you. Good job today, Coach...next week...well the pundits will be spinning with a one loss LSU

i sure hope your right.

The verbal acrobatics would be so entertaining.

UCLA losing 50-0 right now against USC. And this team has an opportunity to play for the Rose Bowl?

Granted there is no chance of that happening. Oregon will annihilate UCLA.

Eric wrote:UCLA losing 50-0 right now against USC. And this team has an opportunity to play for the Rose Bowl?

Granted there is no chance of that happening. Oregon will annihilate UCLA.

Yes, yes, yes...that is going to be an unmitigated joke! And probably fun to watch!

Reading West Coast sports sections...talk about a job that is challenging. Making the PAC∞sound like anything but buffoonery is daunting. What a joke, and not that funny. Have USC Play Oregon in the Rose Bowl and maybe someone might show up. You think you have to pay people to see Wisconsin...wait until UCLA plays Oregon. They will have to include free tickets to Disneyland and they may not be able to tell the difference.

It really is a shame, but that is the farce of these conference championship games. One team is actually your conference winner, but the second game is usually no where near the second place team. We talk about sending the best two teams to the championship game, we should try to get the best two teams in a conference to play to see who is best before we worry at all about the NCG. Maybe someone would want to pay and see the game.

Spence wrote::lol: It really is a shame, but that is the farce of these conference championship games. One team is actually your conference winner, but the second game is usually no where near the second place team. We talk about sending the best two teams to the championship game, we should try to get the best two teams in a conference to play to see who is best before we worry at all about the NCG. Maybe someone would want to pay and see the game.

Oh, so now you are saying that LSU should play Alabama, instead of Georgia for the SEC championship.

In theory, the two division champions playing each other for the conference crown makes good sense. Unfortunately, some times the two best teams happen to be in the same division. In the SEC this year, Georgia benefited from the schedule, not having to play any of the top three teams in the Western Division. That is just how it worked out, and I am not so sure the South Carolina is the better of the two teams having beaten Georgia in Athens. But that is not how it wound up in the W/L column.

If LSU and Alabama played for the SEC championship, then they might just play a third time for the BCS national championship.

I think you just have to have a set of written rules, and then just go by them. If they turn out to not be the best rules, then change them for future years.

They have set a precedent already that said two teams from the same conference shouldn't play in the NCG. They have also used the argument "how can you be in the NCG if you didn't win your conference. Conferences have this championship game to decide who the best teams in the conference is and they don't use it.

My point on the NCG is that you have 120 teams in this league and putting in two teams that have already played each other is wrong. There is no system in place to say this team is better definitively. If we know that one team beat another, give someone else at the top a chance to prove they can do what the other team couldn't - beat the number 1 team.

I believe Alabama is probably the second best team. I still think they had their shot, someone else should go. The voters have said in the past that this is how things should be, they have manipulated the poll to make it happen before.

"They have set a precedent already that said two teams from the same conference shouldn't play in the NCG. They have also used the argument "how can you be in the NCG if you didn't win your conference. Conferences have this championship game to decide who the best teams in the conference is and they don't use it. "

Who has set a precedent? Message board posters and bloogers have opined about winning your conference...But the BCS has said nothing.

In 2006...Florida at 12-1 moved past Michigan at 11-1. Michigan dropped because they didn't have the 12th win and Florida won a big game while Michigan was idle. It wasn't because Michigan was in the same conference...although many pundits and message board posters discussed that. It was because Florida won an extra game, a big game, while Mchigan was through.