Not downplaying who USC is, but I think the 7 game data point will loom large over a team that has played 10+ games, particularly if it is that final spot and it comes down to the Irish, a second place SEC school with one loss, etc.

(10-05-2020 03:01 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Not downplaying who USC is, but I think the 7 game data point will loom large over a team that has played 10+ games, particularly if it is that final spot and it comes down to the Irish, a second place SEC school with one loss, etc.

I think we all know that will be the toughest call for the committee - say a 10-1 Florida team that beat LSU and Georgia and barely loses to Alabama in the SEC title game. or say a 10-1 Notre Dame that beat Clemson in the regular season but then loses close to them in the ACC title game, vs say a 7-0 Oregon or USC.

(10-05-2020 04:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 03:01 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Not downplaying who USC is, but I think the 7 game data point will loom large over a team that has played 10+ games, particularly if it is that final spot and it comes down to the Irish, a second place SEC school with one loss, etc.

I think we all know that will be the toughest call for the committee - say a 10-1 Florida team that beat LSU and Georgia and barely loses to Alabama in the SEC title game. or say a 10-1 Notre Dame that beat Clemson in the regular season but then loses close to them in the ACC title game, vs say a 7-0 Oregon or USC.

I don't think it will be that hard for the CFP committee to put 10-1 Florida in ahead of either 7-0 Oregon or USC in that scenario. In fact, I would be surprised if they didn't.

No. Probably not going to happen. It would have to be Oregon since they're already ranked.

Lot of factors. Which Pac team? Oregon, USC, and Washington are going to get more respect than ASU, Colorado, or Utah. How convincing do they look in wins? If a team runs their schedule and is winning every game by 20+ points thats going to be hard to ignore. What do the other P5 conference champs look like? A 7-0 Pac team isn't going to get in over and undefeated SEC, ACC, or Big 12 team. They might get in over 2-loss SEC and ACC teams and a 1-loss Big 12 team. They'll have a hard time getting by a 1-loss Big 10 champ. The Big 12's poor start has given them a slight opening but they're going to have to root for more chaos from the other leagues.

(10-05-2020 10:05 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Is an undefeated PAC 12 champ who played 6 regular season games and a CCG worthy of a CFP slot when other conferences are playing 8,9, and 10 conference games plus a CCG?

No

(10-05-2020 01:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:56 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:03 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 10:54 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  At 7-0 over say a 10-1 Oklahoma State or Notre Dame who has more data points and would have played a better schedule?

It’s not about who deserves it. Ohio State proved that when they got in over more deserving teams like TCU and Baylor.

The same applies to the likes of Texas and Michigan.

I understand what you are saying, I don’t think USC has the gravitas nationally that an Ohio State, Texas or Michigan do anymore. We’ll see, but I think it is unlikely the Trojans go undefeated anyway.

If USC does not have "the gravitas nationally," how does Texas and Michigan have it? USC has struggled, but there is still a lot of talent there.

Yes, that makes no sense. If USC isn't a bona-fide football blue-blood than nobody is.

Like any blue-blood, they are just one good coaching hire away from being back on top again.

A blue-blood does not average under 60,000 fans a game. Even in an off year. USC has done it two years in a row.

Attendance, 2019:
Michigan, 111,459
Texas: 96,306
USC: 59,358

Attendance, 2018:
Michigan: 110,737
Texas: 97,713
USC: 55,449

(10-05-2020 05:50 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 01:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:56 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:03 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  It’s not about who deserves it. Ohio State proved that when they got in over more deserving teams like TCU and Baylor.

The same applies to the likes of Texas and Michigan.

I understand what you are saying, I don’t think USC has the gravitas nationally that an Ohio State, Texas or Michigan do anymore. We’ll see, but I think it is unlikely the Trojans go undefeated anyway.

If USC does not have "the gravitas nationally," how does Texas and Michigan have it? USC has struggled, but there is still a lot of talent there.

Yes, that makes no sense. If USC isn't a bona-fide football blue-blood than nobody is.

Like any blue-blood, they are just one good coaching hire away from being back on top again.

A blue-blood does not average under 60,000 fans a game. Even in an off year. USC has done it two years in a row.

Attendance, 2019:
Michigan, 111,459
Texas: 96,306
USC: 59,358

Attendance, 2018:
Michigan: 110,737
Texas: 97,713
USC: 55,449

Their 5 year average is over 66,000. More importantly USC claims 11 national championships (T-2) and is top 10 in wins, win percentage, conference championships, all-americans, bowl appearances, players drafted, Heisman winners, and weeks ranked. They are absolutely on the shortest of short lists of elite programs.

Let me see. If you’re in L.A. or in Ann Arbor, what mediocre team would you rather watch in person? One where there’s myriad of things to see and do or one where the options are not that many?

(10-05-2020 05:50 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 01:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:56 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:03 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  It’s not about who deserves it. Ohio State proved that when they got in over more deserving teams like TCU and Baylor.

The same applies to the likes of Texas and Michigan.

I understand what you are saying, I don’t think USC has the gravitas nationally that an Ohio State, Texas or Michigan do anymore. We’ll see, but I think it is unlikely the Trojans go undefeated anyway.

If USC does not have "the gravitas nationally," how does Texas and Michigan have it? USC has struggled, but there is still a lot of talent there.

Yes, that makes no sense. If USC isn't a bona-fide football blue-blood than nobody is.

Like any blue-blood, they are just one good coaching hire away from being back on top again.

A blue-blood does not average under 60,000 fans a game. Even in an off year. USC has done it two years in a row.

Attendance, 2019:
Michigan, 111,459
Texas: 96,306
USC: 59,358

Attendance, 2018:
Michigan: 110,737
Texas: 97,713
USC: 55,449

Who cares about attendance? That does not define a "blue blood." USC just got through with a huge renovation of the LA Coliseum, eliminating 16,000 seats, reducing capacity to about 77,000. One-third of the seats require a membership to the the Trojan Athletic Fund and also require a one-time Coliseum restoration gift. The one-time restoration gift ranges from $100 to $6,000 per seat, while Trojan Athletic Fund memberships begin at $200 annually. Some fans were not happy with the new arrangement or their new seats.

The Pac-12 has been moving start times of games around and that frustrates fans who are making plans for the weekend. USC is 13-12 over the past two seasons and that is not acceptable to Trojan fans. There are just too many things to do that are more enjoyable than watching bad football in South Central LA.

USC has roughly ~32% of the season ticket base Iowa St has. If they’re going to rise back to the PAC-12’s standard bearer, it starts with the fan base. That fan base has not held up its end of the bargain.

The schools that make today’s Ivy League include what were once college football blue bloods but university and athletic department missions change. I think the PAC 12’s days of having an annual national title contender might be drawing to a close.

(10-05-2020 07:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  USC has roughly ~32% of the season ticket base Iowa St has. If they’re going to rise back to the PAC-12’s standard bearer, it starts with the fan base. That fan base has not held up its end of the bargain.

Explain Miami then.

Also, Iowa State is not even close to have the wealth and recruiting territory USC has. Apples to oranges comparison.

A B1G team might get in, but I could easily two ACC and two SEC teams getting in (say, both an 11-1 Georgia or Florida getting in along with an 11-1 Bama, plus a 10-1 Clemson and 10-1 Notre Dame who split the CCG and regular season matchups, particularly since the ACC has four in the top ten as of this week). The PAC-12 was already head and shoulders below the rest of the P5 and even if the Big XII’s apparent self-immolation already this year frees up a spot, and only the SEC gets two teams, pressure will be on to put in an undefeated BYU, and it would be a clever FU to the G5 to let in a non-ND, non-G5 Indy to placate those advocating for the ‘little guy,’ especially if that little guy is BYU, now that UCF is eliminated. Likewise, an unbeaten tOSU would be head and shoulders above a 7-0 SC or Oregon in the CFB considerations.

(10-05-2020 05:50 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 01:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:56 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:03 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  It’s not about who deserves it. Ohio State proved that when they got in over more deserving teams like TCU and Baylor.

The same applies to the likes of Texas and Michigan.

I understand what you are saying, I don’t think USC has the gravitas nationally that an Ohio State, Texas or Michigan do anymore. We’ll see, but I think it is unlikely the Trojans go undefeated anyway.

If USC does not have "the gravitas nationally," how does Texas and Michigan have it? USC has struggled, but there is still a lot of talent there.

Yes, that makes no sense. If USC isn't a bona-fide football blue-blood than nobody is.

Like any blue-blood, they are just one good coaching hire away from being back on top again.

A blue-blood does not average under 60,000 fans a game. Even in an off year. USC has done it two years in a row.

Attendance, 2019:
Michigan, 111,459
Texas: 96,306
USC: 59,358

Attendance, 2018:
Michigan: 110,737
Texas: 97,713
USC: 55,449

USC attendance has sagged the last couple of years, but USC has never had Michigan - Penn State type attendance, it's just not the nature of sports in southern California.

But their blue-blood credentials are impeccable.

(10-05-2020 07:20 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Let me see. If you’re in L.A. or in Ann Arbor, what mediocre team would you rather watch in person? One where there’s myriad of things to see and do or one where the options are not that many?

Ann Arbor is closer to Detroit than most of L.A. County is to USC.

I've lived in San Diego and many other places. Sure, there's tons to do in Southern California..... if you're willing to drive 90 minutes and risk being stuck in a traffic jam that turns it into 2+ hours. But there's very few things to do in your local neighborhood compared to similar sized cities in the Midwest or Northeast. There's no "center of town" for people to go to. There's few parks, parades, church festivals, . L.A. is better than San Diego in that at least it has quality museums and dining options, but the traffic makes a lot of those things further away. And few people swim in L.A. because the water is too cold.

Overall, there's less to do in L.A. than in Detroit, Atlanta, or other larger cities.

(10-05-2020 06:15 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 05:50 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 01:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:56 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  I understand what you are saying, I don’t think USC has the gravitas nationally that an Ohio State, Texas or Michigan do anymore. We’ll see, but I think it is unlikely the Trojans go undefeated anyway.

If USC does not have "the gravitas nationally," how does Texas and Michigan have it? USC has struggled, but there is still a lot of talent there.

Yes, that makes no sense. If USC isn't a bona-fide football blue-blood than nobody is.

Like any blue-blood, they are just one good coaching hire away from being back on top again.

A blue-blood does not average under 60,000 fans a game. Even in an off year. USC has done it two years in a row.

Attendance, 2019:
Michigan, 111,459
Texas: 96,306
USC: 59,358

Attendance, 2018:
Michigan: 110,737
Texas: 97,713
USC: 55,449

Their 5 year average is over 66,000. More importantly USC claims 11 national championships (T-2) and is top 10 in wins, win percentage, conference championships, all-americans, bowl appearances, players drafted, Heisman winners, and weeks ranked. They are absolutely on the shortest of short lists of elite programs.

I think the real question isn't whether an 7-0 PAC-12 Champion SC qualifies for the playoff (they shouldn't), but whether Coach Helton has to go undefeated and win the PAC to keep his job. Using this week's poll, SC won't play a single ranked team unless/until they meet current AP No. 12 Oregon in a hypothetical PAC-12 title game. SC takes on two failed UCLA coaches (current Bruins Coach Chip Kelly and former UCLA, now Colorado HBC Karl Dorrell who has to dig CU out of Mel Tucker's midnight depature), a post-Mike Leach Wazzou that has had bad press all offseason, both of the the mediocre Arizona schools and Utah. That trip to Salt Lake City in November will be SC's toughest game, lose that and a certain, currently unemployed former Utah (and Bowling Green, Florida and Ohio State) coach will likely be waiting on a call from Trojan AD Mike Bohn offering up $$$ to get him to take his talents to South Central.

(10-05-2020 08:17 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 07:54 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  USC has roughly ~32% of the season ticket base Iowa St has. If they’re going to rise back to the PAC-12’s standard bearer, it starts with the fan base. That fan base has not held up its end of the bargain.

Explain Miami then.

Also, Iowa State is not even close to have the wealth and recruiting territory USC has. Apples to oranges comparison.

Good point on bringing Miami up. Miami is the absolute perfect example of what USC could fall into. A once-dynasty that falls into a prolonged period of mediocrity because fan support is well below that of other powers.

The point of bringing up Iowa St was to show that a blueblood like USC shouldn't have one-third the season ticket base of Iowa St. That would never happen at Texas, Michigan, Ohio St, and a myraid of other schools.

USC fans aren't entitled to the on-field success of elite schools unless their fan base provides elite support off-the-field. Until then, USC fans are getting the exact investment they put into the program.

(10-05-2020 11:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:30 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 11:06 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Does an undefeated PAC-12 champ deserve it even in a regular year? Not especially based on their usual performance of getting toasted in the first round.

You must be thinking of the Big 12. They (OU) are 0-4 in the first round in the six years of the college football playoffs. The Pac-12 is 1-1 in the first round. Oregon beat Florida State 59-20 in 2014 and Washington lost to Alabama 24-7 in 2016.

Yes, the Big 12 is the only conference that has so far never won a playoff game.



The PAC's problem is that it hasn't had a "super team", like USC was under Carroll in the Aughts, that gets in to the Top 4 every year. The PAC has been a very good football conference in the CFP era, but has suffered from being balanced at the top and thus has only made the playoffs two out of six years and none in the last three.

No conference would benefit more from an 8-team playoff, with or without a guarantee for conference champs, than the PAC.

No question that PAC-12 football needs a couple of schools to emerge as consistent powers in football. USC should be one and they will eventually get it together because there is too much talent in the neighborhood. Oregon could be the other school, but with Cristobal at head coach, they always seem to be holding back. They get a team down and sit on leads. They have a conservative approach.

With Chip Kelly and Mark Helfrich, they would crush teams that they had down. It always seemed like Justin Herbert was being held back. Now watching him with the Chargers, you can see that he was being held back. They should never have lost to Auburn last season.

I think this season’s schedule is being set-up for an Oregon-USC championship game, with hopefully both teams being unbeaten. That is the only chance the PAC-12 has this season for a playoff shot.

(10-06-2020 02:29 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(10-05-2020 07:20 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Let me see. If you’re in L.A. or in Ann Arbor, what mediocre team would you rather watch in person? One where there’s myriad of things to see and do or one where the options are not that many?

Ann Arbor is closer to Detroit than most of L.A. County is to USC.

I've lived in San Diego and many other places. Sure, there's tons to do in Southern California..... if you're willing to drive 90 minutes and risk being stuck in a traffic jam that turns it into 2+ hours. But there's very few things to do in your local neighborhood compared to similar sized cities in the Midwest or Northeast. There's no "center of town" for people to go to. There's few parks, parades, church festivals, . L.A. is better than San Diego in that at least it has quality museums and dining options, but the traffic makes a lot of those things further away. And few people swim in L.A. because the water is too cold.

Overall, there's less to do in L.A. than in Detroit, Atlanta, or other larger cities.

The reason a mediocre Michigan (or many other bluebloods in their down period) draw so much better than a mediocre USC is because their fan bases are far better. There's tons to do in Ann Arbor and, yes, Detroit, and it's all very accessible. But they've fostered and maintained a culture where CFB never takes a backseat on 7 Saturday's a year.

You can't be an apathetic fan base and at the same time demand the success of other bluebloods. Not when those other bluebloods didn't fall into the spell of apathy in their down periods.