Check out the official blogpoll writeup from SB Nation.

1. LSU – LSU was the best team in the country for every day of last season except the last and they should be at least just as talented as they were in 2011. They should be virtually impossible to pass against with Sam Montgomery and Barkevious Mingo on the ends and Tyrann Mathieu patrolling the backfield. They will have a tough offensive line and backfield and just need a quarterback to be almost unbeatable.

2. Alabama – It feels weird to have them behind LSU, but the Crimson Tide simply lost a ton of talent to the NFL. Regardless, the defending champs return a good amount of starters from one of the best defenses of all-time and a strong offensive line.

3. USC – The Trojans are probably the best all-around team going into the season and feature the nation’s best quarterback and receiver. They should also be extremely hungry after having sat out the postseason the last two years.

4. Oklahoma – The Sooners have seemed to underachieve in recent years but the 2011 squad is loaded with experience, talent and possibly the nation’s best quarterback outside of Matt Barkley.

5. Georgia – This team is so ridiculously talented and experienced, particularly on defense that I almost considered ranking them No. 3. If Mark Richt can finally get his team to live up to expectations the Bulldogs will contend for the SEC title.

6. Oregon – Oregon is the rare modern day program which can graduate most of its talent and not skip a beat because of their system. They took a little bit of a hit with the unexpected deflection of Darron Thomas but unless something serious comes out between now and the start of the season, expect the Ducks to pick up right where they left off.

Continue reading this post »

The Sporting News gave out their Pac-12 coaching rankings.The suspects go as you would suspect. Chip Kelly is first, because DUH. Lane Kiffin isn't too far behind, and Kyle Wittingham, Steve Sarkisian and David Shaw rounding up the top of the charts. Everyone else is either unproven or on the downside.

There was one curious result: Mike Leach is number two.

Mike Leach's current record in the Pac-12 is 0-0.

In related news, Sporting News also believes Andrew Luck is the third or fourth best quarterback in the NFL and the Oregon Ducks 2015 new uniforms are the best they've ever come up with (possible mockup here).

Continue reading this post »

A college football playoff proposal seems to be taking shape, and it does appear to be Because Jim Delany usually gets what he wants, here's the current proposal on the table that involves the top six. Brett McMurphy files his latest report.

Delany, who met with CBSSports.com and other reporters on Wednesday in Chicago, said one proposal being considered is the conference champion only model, but that the conference champion would have to be ranked among the top six teams in the country to qualify.

If a conference champion was among the top six in the rankings, it would automatically qualify for the four-team playoff. The top four ranked conference champions among the top six would qualify and if less than four conference champions were among the top six teams then the remaining spots would be filled by the highest ranked non-conference champions or an independent (Notre Dame, BYU, Army or Navy).

Yet despite this push by Delany, based on previous results, it wouldn't really benefit the Big Ten too much. Outside of Ohio State, they have trouble ranking ahead of the other big conferences and tend to fall behind the pack. In fact, it's the Pac-12 that ends up in the best shape on this deal, as they end up right behind.

Land Grant Holy Land breaks down the numbers on who would make the mythical Football Final Four, and here's the overall conference representation.

Big 12 - 12
SEC -12
Pac-12 - 11
Big East - 6
Big Ten - 6
MWC - 4
ACC - 4
Notre Dame - 1

For those who believe the Trojans do provide an extra layer of protection for the conference, they do have some disproportionate representation. USC is heavily involved for the Pac-12: Five of the eleven bids come from the Men of Troy. However, there are similar representation issues for the other conferences, with Oklahoma taking five of the 12 Big 12 bids, Ohio State half of the six Big Ten bids, Miami (FL) taking half the Big East bids, Florida State three out of the four ACC bids, and LSU and Alabama taking half of the 12 SEC bids. So this sort of favoritism exists everywhere in college football with all the major powers.

In fact, the Pac-10 would have half their schools achieve at least one playoff bid during this period, or at least 50% of schools making their mark. That 50% rate is equal to the Big 12 (six out of 12 schools), SEC (six out of 12 schools), Big East (four out of nine schools), and better than the Big Ten (four schools) or ACC (two schools). That puts them nearly at the same level as the two traditional powers, giving them around a 70 to 80% chance of having a team in the playoff every year.

So we can project that a Pac-12 team will be in a playoff approximately three of every four seasons. Compare this to the old BCS title system where USC and Oregon are involved in three title games, and it's clear this arrangement works far better in giving the conference a chance to boast the best team out there.

After the jump, you can take a look at the data by team and conference.

Continue reading this post »

All throughout the process of reforming college football's process to determine a national champion, the Pac-12 and Big Ten wanted to make sure their interests were protected in one crucial aspect. Whatever happened with regards to a postseason, in some form or another, the Rose Bowl needed to survive.

And for good reason. The Rose Bowl has become the lone non-BCS bowl to withstand the changing college football landscape. It's one of the lone refuges of bowl expansions and schedule changes and neutral site games in NFL stadiums and expansion, expansion, expansion. At all costs, the Pac-12 and Big Ten had to put up as much of a front to ensure the Rose Bowl Game survived.

It looks like it will, if this current story is close to being true. We won't get our Football Four, but it's pretty close.

In an effort to maintain a sense of tradition, conferences would keep their relationships with BCS bowl games -- the highest-ranked ACC team would play in the Orange Bowl, Big 12 in the Fiesta, Big Ten and Pac-12 in the Rose Bowl, and SEC in the Sugar Bowl. For instance, if Alabama finished No. 1 in the retooled BCS standings, the Crimson Tide would host the No. 4 seed in a national semifinal game at the Allstate Sugar Bowl in New Orleans. If Oregon finished No. 2, the Ducks would host the No. 3 seed in the Rose Bowl Game presented by VIZIO in Pasadena, Calif. A source familiar with the discussions said he preferred this particular plan because it "preserves tradition and the regional tie-ins."

The source said it also solved the "Rose Bowl problem" -- Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott have maintained their leagues' desire to play in the Rose Bowl every season.

Under this proposed plan, if a Big Ten or Pac-12 team finished in the top two spots, it would automatically play in Pasadena. And if a Big Ten or Pac-12 team didn't finish in the top two, teams from those leagues might still play in the Rose Bowl, as long as they were among the teams included in the BCS pool. The source said the plan maintained those leagues' relationships with the Rose Bowl, without giving them an "obscene consideration."

The second scenario where Big Ten and Pac-12 are considered for a Rose Bowl contest is unclear, and probably won't get hedged out until everyone figures out the four-team playoff format (top four conference champions or top four overall teams?). So there's a chance the Rose Bowl could function outside a playoff format if neither Big Ten or Pac-12 representatives are part of the four-team playoff.

But with two conferences affiliated with the Rose Bowl, it's far more likely that the game and teams from those conferences would be part of the playoff process, and there still remains a high probability of a Rose Bowl matchup of some sort occurring.

So last year you'd have something like...

Top four team format
#1 LSU vs. #4 Stanford (Sugar)
#2 Alabama vs. #3 Oklahoma State (Fiesta) (since Oklahoma State won their conference, can't imagine anyone consenting to two Sugar Bowls)

Championship game somewhere.

Rose Bowl stays intact, Oregon vs. Wisconsin

Conference championship format
#1 LSU vs. #10 Wisconsin (Sugar)
#3 Oklahoma State vs. #5 Oregon (Fiesta)

Rose Bowl probably becomes consolation Big Ten/Pac-12 game, like Michigan vs. Stanford. Tradition preserved!

Let's go back through the years now.

Continue reading this post »

A playoff is coming. The big question for the Pac-12: Will it be the type of playoff that exists for the greatest absolute benefit of the conference?

It seems the only proposals left on the table are four team playoffs, meaning that the BCS as we know it will cease to exist after the contract runs out through the 2014 season. The plus one is coming, which ensures that Pac-12 schools will stand a good chance of having a representative every year.

It remains to be seen what format will be the one used though, and that could end up determining who ends up dancing in this contest.

• Will it be the #1 vs #4, #2 vs #3 format that a lot of conferences favor for its simplicity? It makes a lot of sense when you think of it...until you realize this strategy ends up putting the election back in the hands of the voters that have always tended to favor the East Coast schools and particularly the Southern bloc.
  
• Will it be a conference championship format that favors the top four conferences? Obviously that qualification would end up back in the hands of the voters, and it probably wouldn't give us the top four teams playing each other, but it would provide us with more of a regular season that matters.
  

Larry Scott is clearly in favor of the final proposal, as he stated at the earlier winter meetings.

"So much of the passion of a move to a playoff is to see it earned on the field," Scott said. "What more clear way to have intellectual consistency with the idea of a playoff than to earn it as a conference champion? It would de-emphasize the highly subjective polls that are based on a coach and media voting and a few computers." He added that any formula "based more on results" would be good for the sport.

Obviously this wouldn't clear up all the headaches (you'd have to figure out the top four conferences, but that could more easily be configured based on head-to-heads and strength of schedule formulas), but it does seem like a more reasonable model than any of the currently maddening systems that have been put in place to begin with.

So you've probably heard about this plus-one modification proposal.

In the latter plan, the four highest-ranked teams at the end of the regular season would meet in semifinals unless the Big Ten or Pac-12 champ, or both, were among the top four. Those leagues' teams still would meet in the Rose, and the next highest-ranked team or teams would slide into the semis. The national championship finalists would be selected after those three games.

If you're a fan of determining an ultimate college football champion, the Rose Bowl opt-in playoff proposal is a stupid idea. Instead of minimizing the impact of popularity contests, it would give us TWO of them--one to determine who gets in these bowl games, and another to determine the two best teams of the three to decide to play in the title. It'd be a guaranteed uproar every season, like the worst possible episode of Toddlers and Tiaras imaginable.

That being said.

There's no reason for the Pac-12 NOT to explore, much less oppose the idea.

Out of all the remaining bowls left in an archaic postseason system, the Rose Bowl is the only left with any brand power. It's the only still constantly played on New Year's Day, it has the marquee Tournament Of Roses parade, and it always brings in the highest TV ratings of any of the bowl contests that isn't the title game. It stands thanks to the one thing that is eroding every day in college athletics: Tradition. The lasting power of Big Ten/Pac-12 in Pasadena keeps it propped up over the latest battle of ACC/Big East retreads in Miami or whatever Frankensteinian machination the Fiesta Bowl throws out at us every season.

If you want to know why Jim Delany is not to be trifled with, proposals like this one are why. The Big Ten commissioner still holds enormous sway in the NCAA universe, and he plans to use every bit of it to leverage the meaning of the Rose Bowl toward the next playoff system. His conference has been marginalized after Ohio State got waxed two title games straight, and he wants back in on the action. A Rose Bowl neutral site game guarantees the Big Ten the best possible opportunity at a national championship berth, and it's guaranteed to get the most TV ratings. Make it meaningful, and those ratings will almost certainly leap up, and the revenue will flow in for both conferences.

Larry Scott may represent the future of college athletics, but for now Delany is the present, and I doubt Scott would be totally opposed to this if it was the nuclear option. They can either get Scott's intended proposal (a plus-one with home games rather than neutral bowl games for the top two teams), or they get a dumb Delany plan that still maximizes the Pac-12's chances of getting a title berth. It ensures the Big Ten and the Pac-12 a seat at the table every year, deserved or not. It's not like the polls or the computers will help those two conferences out, considering the growing SEC creep every year. When in doubt, appeal to the self-interest of the conference.

If Scott can't get what he wants, might as well throw his weight behind an idea no one else wants His noncommittal reply is good enough.

If the PAC 12 wasn’t the most interesting conference in the country already, it is now. Offseason acquisitions and retooling left the PAC 12 with 4 of the nation’s most respected offensive gurus out there: Chip Kelly at Oregon, Noel Mazzone at UCLA, Mike Leach at WSU, and Rich Rodriguez at Arizona. All four coaches are distinctly different, attacking different parts of the defense with different looks and concepts, but all of them accomplish remarkably similar tasks.

This is the first report, of potentially many, highlighting and comparing the dynamic offenses in the PAC 12-Conference. The subject of this first report will be the inside running game.

While at West Virginia, Rich Rodriguez had his Mountaineers on the verge of being called a true powerhouse program. But after the Mountaineers (then ranked #2) fell to their hated rivals Pittsburgh in the final game of the season, Rodriguez bolted for Michigan and his tremendous "let's see how far we can go without playing defense" collapse in Ann Arbor is known throughout the nation. Rodriguez though, is an offensive genius; a pioneer of the run-based spread offense, and a great developer of skill positions.

Noel Mazzone, now at UCLA after being at ASU for a season, is a prototypical spread and shred offensive coordinator. Using a variety of formations, coupled with motion, a quick running game, and dynamic passing tree, Mazzone was the main reason for ASU's offensive turnaround. Mazzone's offense is relatively simple, and adaptable.

Mike Leach is, by all means, the most radical of all spread coaches, but perhaps the most brilliant. The Airraid offense was something that had flown under the radar for a while, but after this play, the high powered, fast paced, air it out offense turned into an actual offensive scheme. If there were any doubt about this offense being a legitimate (not gimmicky) scheme, it was redacted by Geno Smith's performance in the 2012 Orange Bowl: click here.

Chip Kelly is another radical "Spread Scientist," using sometimes extreme formations (explained further here) and a rapid, aggressive style to put up lots, and lots, and lots of points. Kelly might be the best coach in the nation at using talent in unique, productive fashions.

All four coaches are different, but the same. Let's do some quick analysis after the jump:

Continue reading this post »

LSU and Oregon was a pretty kickass way to start the 2011 college football season for the Pac-12 on a grand stage. It fulfilled the classic matchup of offense versus defense that most of the nation coveted between two of the best teams college football had to offer. And the result was pretty fun for everyone but the Pac-12, who saw their flagship team of the year make mistake after mistake on their way out the door in Dallas.

Regardless, the game was a spectacle. It gave the conference enormous pub it wouldn't have normally enjoyed from a non-USC matchup.

Now? It probably won't happen again. Not the way it happened that opening night in 2011. Bryan Fischer of CBS Sports reports.

The Pac-12's continuing push into the media business with an upcoming conference network and digital platform will have a lasting effect on member schools' football schedules. According to the league's updated executive regulations, non-conference neutral site football games will no longer be permitted unless the conference gets their cut of the media rights:

No member institution shall enter into an agreement to play a neutral-site football game (except in circumstances where such neutral-site game is the away leg of a home-and-home series) unless such agreement provides the Conference with the exclusive broadcast rights and digital rights in all media, and copyright to such neutral-site game.

This makes sense for numerous reasons for the conference. For one, neutral site games are not usually well-attended. Fans of the conference do travel, but not in great numbers (bowl attendance should tell you that the Pac-12 lags a bit if it isn't one of the top two or three matchups). So Scott and the Pac-12 would like to minimize the number of contests unless they have something to gain. If the Pac-12 is to agree to such contests and increase their probability of winning future contests, they must be content to let these current stragglers go.

In general from a financial viewpoint, it's beneficial for the Pac-12 Network to ensure that they get as much profit as they can from these neutral site contests. Games like Cal-Fresno State in Candlestick or Colorado-Colorado State in Denver would be considered premium content for the network, and would provide marquee regional matchups that would be worth quite a lot to the conference. Best to garner as much income from these games as possible to ensure the network is maximizing on all potential TV opportunities.

Finally, location-wise, almost all neutral site games between major conference foes will be at a distinct disadvantage to the Pac-12. The majority of locations chosen for these neutral site contests are Midwest/East Coast locations like Dallas, Atlanta, New York, and Washington DC. Thus, these "neutral" games are pretty much masquerading as road contests for the conference. For example, LSU-Oregon was a neutral-site contest in only the strictest sense of the word. The Tigers drew nearly three times the fans, and considering the distance each fanbase had to travel to Dallas, it's hardly a surprise the breakdown occurred as it did. There needs to be some balance--namely, a second "neutral site" game that would geographically benefit Oregon.

In other words, don't expect an LSU-Oregon matchup to go down in Dallas unless you expect a return visit a year later to a "neutral" site in Seattle or San Francisco or Phoenix or Denver. The Ducks would get their chance at revenge on the field of their choice that benefits their own neutrality, maximizing the return for both schools and maintaining competitive balance.

These are the sort of things a typical college commissioner wouldn't think too much about. But Larry Scott and his new braintrust is anything but typical.