Pac-12 Will Dominate College Football in 2012

Tall Tiger, I have to agree that LSU has a defense that USC hasn't had to face as of yet. Lines do dictate games and I'd say the edge in that department has to go to LSU. It makes a USC-LSU a difficult choir to say the least.


Both teams will be well motivated. The Tigers due to losing to Bama, the Trojans due to the bowl bans and schollie restrictions.A stick it to the NCAA mentality is strong among the faithful.

 It's a bit of a bad scenario for LSU in that LSU should win. They're 10 players deeper than USC! It's almost a damned if you do and damned if you don't. A Tiger win? Well, you should beat a diminished USC. Lose? Hoo boy, Miles' legacy becomes tarnished with back to back losses.


Miles is much more experienced than Kiffin, yet Kiffin may be the better play caller. 


The key here is at the QB position. A full fourth year starting QB, having been at the helm of some of the weakest Trojans in the last 10-12 years. He knows adversity. He will be able to audible this season.(too many freshmen on the offense last season to make it work)  His abilty to adjust to a good rush with screen passes, roll outs will be the difference IMO. He will take what's given to him by the Tigers.


No, USC hasn't faced a defense like LSU's....LSU hasn't faced an offense like USC's.....      

And Oregon's down game came against LSU.

Mostly due to LSU's play just as our down game was mostly due to superb play by Alabama.

   

Alabama might have been the most talented defensive team but were nowhere near the most talented offense


   Overall most talented, they had the most players taken in the 1st round and overall in the last draft and they will have a lot in the next draft but probably less than LSU & USC.  In overall talent last year, I would rank it Bama, LSU, and USC based on the last draft and the upcoming one.  On the upcoming year, it's LSU, USC, then Alabama.  Talent doesn't guarantee anything but you can't be great w/o a lot of it. 

LSU hasn't faced an offense like USC's


Might be debatable because we faced WVU with a great QB & WR and who ranked higher in passing and total offense than USC.  Yes, they gained a bunch of yards through the air but we won by 4 TD on their field.  We completely took away their running game and forced them into mistakes with our great rushing DE's and defensive backfield led by the Honey Badger.


We also faced a great Oregon offense and completely took them out of their running game and turned them into a 55 passes team. 

Don't see Stanford or UCLA doing much this next year...might want to watch Mizz, TAMU and Miss State....gonna surprise some folks

I understand Alabama might have been the most "talented" team and in no way saying SC had or has more talent than LSU or Alabama, I was just rebutting because the question asked if your defense was going to be better than the last time anyone saw, and it made a below average Pac-12 QB look great.

Tall Tiger, hmm, your right debatable, especially comparing WVU's schedule vs USC's. Numbers don't tell the whole story. I don't have much problem saying that the Pac's offenses tend to be the best in the nation.


No disrespect to WVU, but that comparison is a hard one to swallow....  

As a WVU fan, I would agree with NWTRUCKER on the comparison of the WV and USC schedules. No way the SOS is even close. That's why I am grateful to be leaving the BE and taking on the BG12. However, the WV offense was also trying to adjust to a brand new offense. They did a pretty good job early on, but had a few games where they sputtered and had issues executing the new schemes. But as time went on, they figured it out and were clicking on all cylinders by the end of the season - as Clemson can attest. So even though the competition level will be markedly superior this coming season compared to last year (with a few exceptions), WV will be fielding a seasoned offense with key players in their Senior season and I am expecting WV to equal or best last years numbers. I could be dreaming, but please, don't wake me just yet.

WVU has always been a fun team to watch (my condolences for the loss of Stewart) for years now. It does seem like when they had White and Slaton was when they reached toe mountain top and havent quite stayed up there since. Now dont get me wrong they are a upper tier team but I agree that they are not in the class of USC. I would love to see how they do this year because of the lack of disrespect due to a sub par conference. However the Big 12 is no cake walk. Im glad they stepped up though because if they were to go undefeated they would deserve a title shot in my opinion. Boise St cannot say that as they moved slightly up but still toa league lacking football respect.

Don't see Stanford or UCLA doing much this next year...might want to watch Mizz, TAMU and Miss State....gonna surprise some folks

I gotta disagree with you on Stanford and on UCLA. Stanford had a strong recruiting class and my understanding is that they have a pretty good replacement for Luck. Obviously he is no Luck but should be able to manage the game. His transition should be easier with the return of their starting RB. They lose a good portion of their fire power through the air but again have guys who didnt play much last year but still got the game experience. They will still be good enough this year. 

UCLA is the team with the bigger question mark in my opinion. I am guessing that they will struggle early but put things together toward the end of September early Oct. This will be because they will finally bench the guys who have underachieved the past 2-3 years and the younger talent starting with the QB will be ready and hungry. 

Again this is all just opinion but if and when it happens i will not be surprised one bit.  

We also faced a great Oregon offense and completely took them out of their running game and turned them into a 55 passes team. 

Hey Tall, tell us  how that great defense in 2009 manhandle that 0 & 12 Washington coming into that game. You know, where, Washington beat LSU in every category except the score board?

Yeah, that scoreboard category can be tricky.

This message has been removed by the administrator.

tell us  how that great defense in 2009 manhandle that 0 & 12 Washington


You're either ignorant of the facts are trying to make a spin.  LSU beat Udub and Jake Locker and then Udub went down and beat USC 2 weeks later.  So we did what USC could not do.  I was at that game and though Udub put up a good game, LSU was the better team. 


As far as people throwing out stats that they outgained LSU but lost the game, that happens a lot because LSU has routinely led the nation in special teams categories plus Miles will go into conservative no risk mode once he has a lead, as he did in Seattle.


In our 11 game win streak over Pac-10 teams, we've won 4 of those games by 42+ points, soundly beaten the Pac-10 Champion a couple of years, and yes, we've won a couple games by 1 point.  Next year, we move to 12 straight when we face and will beat Udub again.     

Tall Tiger, I think you put a little too much faith in the stats of seasons gone by. Obviously, USC has had a couple of down years compared to their norm, frankly, considering how long they just reloaded each season, a drop was probably overdue.


There is no question, in my mind this is a one-two, two-one scenario for USC and LSU and I'm more than satisfied either way, ranking wise.


The Pac-12 is and will be even stronger this season, much better over-all recruiting and up-grades in coaching as well. Cyclic or a new level? Time will tell. I give the pre-season edge to USC, but just. USC also has depth issues at RB and D-line. USC could drop easier than LSU, ranking wise, very quickly with key injuries, student problems, etc.     


Your question mark is at QB, obviously, if he has development problems, you, too, will drop, ranking wise. So far so good. For both teams. 

I'll take a chance and post without reading anything other than the thread title. In the PAC you have SoCal and? There's no one as that can beat any of the bigs from the Big12 or SEC. SoCal? Yes. Anyone else in the PAC on a yearly basis? lol no.

I'll take a chance and post without reading anything other than the thread title. In the PAC you have SoCal and? There's no one as that can beat any of the bigs from the Big12 or SEC. SoCal? Yes. Anyone else in the PAC on a yearly basis? lol no.

Well Oregon kinda beat OU 1 time in their history of playing each other...  Looking forward to USC showing up again, and I'm interested to see what kind of thorn in the side Leach is going to cause for the Pac like he did in the B12.

I'll take a chance and post without reading anything other than the thread title. In the PAC you have SoCal and? There's no one as that can beat any of the bigs from the Big12 or SEC. SoCal? Yes. Anyone else in the PAC on a yearly basis? lol no.

I would think that you should include Oregon and also include Stanford. Those two teams for sure can hold their own pretty well and have for the past few years. The rest have vastly underachieved and history has shown that most good programs dont stay down for long and all it takes is a couple of top players or a new coach and system. Look at Bama before Saban, Michigan before Hoke, SC before Carroll. The Pac is due to rise from the ashes and with all of the transition from last year to this year it seems only fitting that this be the year it happens. 

@4SoCalFan: last 10 years title count please.... and you need to play all those OCC games because that High School Conference schedule you play is so hard... and please dont tell me you play ND every year. Hoover High in Birmingham Al will spot ND 14 a game and beat them every time ND is a joke  

While the SEC has gotten the votes needed to win the beauty contest, it doesn't mean much. They enjoy getting the most teams voted high in the pre-season polls every year which gives them an automatic advantage . Teams that don't get started in the top 25 have to go undefeated while average SEC teams keep getting voted high enough to artificially inflate the SEC's sos, which in turn gives the illusion that even SEC teams with losses are better than the undefeated teams that just didn't get votes. That's why all your SEC titles get dismissed as "mythical". With an 8 team play-off, I would say the winner really is the champion. A plus 1 or limited 4 team play-off with the teams chosen by beauty contest votes would still be only a "beauty contest - mythical" champ IMO.