Believe it, Duck Fans: USC Is for Real

[geoquack]

On 2/14/2022 at 1:14 PM, SLKDuckFanFrom77 said:

Not that I disagree with you about the whole Lincoln Riley big fish small pond thing, but he was a fish in the BIG12. The SWC collapsed in the mid 90s and hasn’t existed since 1996. 
 

Thanks for correcting.  I was spacing on the name of the conference and "Southwest" sounded good.  Wrong!

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/14/2022 at 11:28 AM, Jon Joseph said:

The Rose Bowl is a playoff semifinal site next season. 2Ls in 2022 will likely get the Ducks to the Fiesta Bowl, but not the Rose Bowl.

WRONG! RB is NOT a semifinal site next season. Peach and Fiesta Bowls are the semi sites.

[Guest Axel]

On 2/14/2022 at 4:54 PM, Jon Joseph said:

RB is NOT a semifinal site next season. Peach and Fiesta Bowls are the semi sites.

The following season, 2023-24, the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl will be semifinal sites, with both games played on New Year's Day. On January 8, 2024, the championship game is scheduled to be played at NRG Stadium in Houston. 

 

Perhaps in 2024, the Ducks will repeat their Rose Bowl semifinal success from 2015 and win their first--or second--national championship. 

[Mike West]

On 2/14/2022 at 5:06 PM, cartm25 said:

don't quite follow the Clemson argument. I've used Clemson as the poster child example for how not having a "USC" to contend with in the conference has NOT hurt them in the slightest.

 

 

Clemson would be just another Oklahoma had they rectified to Funimate their conference instead of acquire enough talent to compete with Alabama.  

 

In other words, they looked beyond their conference and completed nationally for recruits.  Look at them now.  They're simply another Notre Dame.

 

Michigan is now poised to replace Clemson now that they have shed the Ohio State monkey.  Which means a very weak PAC12 will not bolster our shot ( do you really believe we lose to Stanford and hold our position with the Cincinnati narrative and Bama defeating Georgia? Utah lost to BYU, and had two losses, do they weren't going to bolster our status).

 

Beyond next year, without a Georgia type team to bolster our eye test credibility, our "championship worthy" conference drags is down if USC starts down and Utah doesn't go undefeated.  

 

Dominating a weak conference is just Norte Dame going undefeated in the eyes of the playoff committee.  The SEC West and the Big Ten East are going to capture eyeballs ( and if we get another Baylor- Oklahoma State narrative in the Big 12, forget about the conference of Olympic Champions.).

 

We need four Pete Carroll and Chris Peterson type teams.  USC elevates the entire conference.  They still have to catch us.  

[Just Ducky]

On 2/14/2022 at 8:28 AM, Jon Joseph said:

The Rose Bowl is a playoff semifinal site next season. 2Ls in 2022 will likely get the Ducks to the Fiesta Bowl, but not the Rose Bowl.

Thanks Jon, missed that one.

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/15/2022 at 10:17 AM, Just Ducky said:

Thanks Jon, missed that one.

I'm glad you missed it because I was WRONG! Peach and Fiesta Bowls are next seasons semifinal sites. Pac-12 champ will be playing on 1/2/23 in the Rose Bowl.

[Guest Axel]

On 2/15/2022 at 8:14 AM, cartm25 said:

I’ll agree that four Pete Carroll/Chris Peterson-type teams would make the conference, on the whole, look stronger, but it wouldn’t help Oregon’s chances of making the CFP. Just ask Harbaugh at Michigan (or any B10 team not named tOSU), or any SEC team not named Bama/GA, or any ACC team not named Clemson, or any B12 team not named Oklahoma.

I totally agree. A perfect regular Pac-12 season would be nine teams at 6-6, Washington at 0-12, USC at 0-12, and Oregon at 12-0 (13-0, after the conference championship.) In fact, I'd take an entire decade just like this.

 

Would it hurt the Ducks if USC lost 120 games in a row? No. We'd make the College Football Playoff every year. And our rodent cousins just north of Eugene, by virtue of 10 consecutive 6-6 seasons, would make 10 straight Weed Whacker Bowls.

[Quackerbacker]

And sometimes TWO  teams from the SEC are invited to the cookout.  Both with 1 losses.  

[Darren Perkins]

On 2/16/2022 at 5:55 AM, Wrathis said:

Sorry, just coming back from a long weekend in the RV. I really do understand the perspective being laid out here. However, I have to counter with this: Clemson is who they are in spite of their conference, not because of it. They played on the stage with 'Bama and won, period. Oklahoma is the Clemson of the Big12 with one really glaring caveat; they lost (on the same stage Clemson played on) and are rightly being lambasted in this thread bc of it. Perhaps being the big dog in a weak conference is a way to get on the stage, but if you don't win when you get there it accomplishes nothing. Being the big dog in a stronger conference allows you to slip and still get to the playoff, bc a one loss (and sometimes two loss) SEC team is always invited to the cookout...

 

Agree with this. Clemson won two Natty's over Bama, that puts to bed any "but they come from a weak conference" talk. And, obviously, they had to beat a quality opponent to even get to the championship game. 

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/16/2022 at 11:48 AM, Darren Perkins said:

 

Agree with this. Clemson won two Natty's over Bama, that puts to bed any "but they come from a weak conference" talk. And, obviously, they had to beat a quality opponent to even get to the championship game. 

Great take Darren.

 

Clemson is in a 'weaker conference' that plays its games on the east coast when folks are still awake. It is also a conference with a network owned and operated by ESPN that runs 2 daily shows dedicated to Clemson and CFB in season. And Clemson is in far better recruiting ground than is Oregon. Also, when Clemson has QBs like Watson and Lawrence it uses them and does not bury them like Mario buried Justin Herbert. And Clemson in the last few seasons has sent a number of stud DL guys to the pros.

 

 

Clemson was down last season but played great D, finished 10-3 and ranked in the AP Final top 25. How 'down' is the ACC compared to the Pac-12? The ACC had 4 teams ranked at the end of the 2021 season; the Pac-12, 2. And although they have not played like it as of late, in people's minds FSU and Miami are still blue bloods. When it comes to blue bloods in the Pac-12, folks east of the Rockies think USC, and that's it.

 

Where do Pac-12 fans think Clemson, Pitt, Wake and NC State would have finished in 'the Pac-16' last season? IMO, none of these teams would have finished in the bottom half of the conference.

[Darren Perkins]

On 2/16/2022 at 9:15 AM, Jon Joseph said:

Great take Darren.

 

Clemson is in a 'weaker conference' that plays its games on the east coast when folks are still awake. It is also a conference with a network owned and operated by ESPN that runs 2 daily shows dedicated to Clemson and CFB in season. And Clemson is in far better recruiting ground than is Oregon. Also, when Clemson has QBs like Watson and Lawrence it uses them and does not bury them like Mario buried Justin Herbert. And Clemson in the last few seasons has sent a number of stud DL guys to the pros.

 

 

Clemson was down last season but played great D, finished 10-3 and ranked in the AP Final top 25. How 'down' is the ACC compared to the Pac-12? The ACC had 4 teams ranked at the end of the 2021 season; the Pac-12, 2. And although they have not played like it as of late, in people's minds FSU and Miami are still blue bloods. When it comes to blue bloods in the Pac-12, folks east of the Rockies think USC, and that's it.

 

Where do Pac-12 fans think Clemson, Pitt, Wake and NC State would have finished in 'the Pac-16' last season? IMO, none of these teams would have finished in the bottom half of the conference.

 

Good stuff. And FSU and Miami are in the USC of the 2010's mode, meaning that they are underachieving. They could get back to greatness with the right coach. Though Miami won't get back to greatness under MC, he will absorb alot of quality recruits, while the verdict is still out on Mike Norvell at FSU, but he could be the guy. 

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/16/2022 at 12:50 PM, cartm25 said:

Given the staunchest competition consistently faced by Clemson was Syracuse and Pitt, the only thing Clemson's two natty's show is how well CLEMSON recruited, and how well CLEMSON was coached, and how much CLEMSON dominated their weak conference. The other ACC teams constantly getting blown out by Clemson over their run don't get credit for CLEMSON's wins in the CFP.

? 1 season when Watson was hurt, Clemson lost at Syracuse, made and won the playoff. A number of Clemson ACC games have ended in 1 score games. Line the top 12 ACC teams up in a theoretical matchup with the Pac-12 and who do you think would come out on top? UCLA got a COVID break last season not having to play NC State. Instead of losing to Miami, WAZZU lost to Central Michigan. Clemson last season lost against Pitt, NC State and Georgia. 

 

The ACC in CFB is a deeper and better conference than is the Pac-12.

[Guest Axel]

On 2/16/2022 at 9:50 AM, cartm25 said:

Given the staunchest competition consistently faced by Clemson was Syracuse and Pitt, the only thing Clemson's two natty's show is how well CLEMSON recruited, and how well CLEMSON was coached, and how much CLEMSON dominated their weak conference.

Excellent points.

 

A dominant Oregon would be the darling of the West Coast and get a lot of bandwagon love from the East Coast "experts" who commonly pay more attention to teams east of the Rockies.

 

The future success of the Ducks will depend on how well Lanning & Co. recruit and coach, and even more importantly, on how well the Ducks perform on the field. Whether the Pac-12 is perceived as weak or strong will be a secondary consideration. If the Ducks can dominate, they will get their invites to the College Football Playoff. 

 

In short, the destiny of the Ducks is in their own hands. And for the record, I'd rather boat-race USC than beat them with a 55-yard field goal that grazes the crossbar and plops over it as time expires. 

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/16/2022 at 1:56 PM, cartm25 said:

Watson never lost to Syracuse . . . but did lose to Pitt. Starting in 2015, Clemson's margin of victory averaged near 20. When T. Lawrence took over for three years, Clemson's margin of victory was 30 points in 2 of 3 years. The ACC conference wasn't challenging Clemson, with the exception of spirited efforts from Syracuse/Pitt who would never be confused with a full-powered USC.

 

I'm not comparing the strength of the P12 to the ACC, just stating that the ACC is weak relative to Clemson, and provided zero resistance to Clemson since 2015. But, I will entertain your hypothetical and even assume you're right that the ACC is stronger than the P12. Being stronger than the P12 does NOT = STRONG.

 

I am bigger, faster, and stronger than my 6-year old son, but that does not make me big, fast, or strong. I'm an out-of-shape, middle-aged man that would hardly be described, at the moment, as those things. 

 

Two questions: 1) Where was Clemson's USC during their run starting in 2015? (Clemson rose when FSU faded), and 2) Is Dabo praying that Miami/FSU return to their former glory because it will help Clemson? 

Thanks for the great reply. Who was the Clemson QB who was hurt when the Tigers lost at Syracuse? I could have sworn it was Watson?

 

Being stronger than the Pac-12 does not = strong; AMEN! 

 

I don't think Dabo is praying for tougher competition but I believe the Pac-12 commissioner is doing so? I love the Ducks but Oregon has ZERO CFB championships and 1 Heisman winner. The Blue Blood in the conference is USC. Oregon rose when SC faded but not to the level of winning playoff titles.

 

Does SC have to be good for Oregon to make the playoff? Heck no. Any P5 team that goes 13-0 is in the playoff.

 

Does Oregon have to recruit DL guys like Clemson to win a championship? Looking at the PO winners to date, this seems to be the case.

 

Does SC have to be good for the conference to score better media deals? I have to answer this question with a 'Yes.' Along with, conference teams playing better in their OOC and bowl games would not hurt the cause.

 

Again. great points + great reply. From experience I can advise you that sooner than you think possible, that 6 year old little guy will be bigger, faster and stronger than Dad.