Down year for the Pac-10? Bowl games prove otherwise

January 7, 12:11 PMCal Bears ExaminerRob Calonge

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Cal Bears Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

As the Cal Bears Examiner, we are tasked with bringing you the most relevant stories associated with your California Golden Bears.  Be that as it may, we make an attempt to remain objective while bringing those stories to you.  There are times when, while bringing these stories, we can't help wondering, "Why doesn't the national media see what we see?"

The answer is pretty simple.  We hate to use any excuse, but some excuses are true reasons for the answers that you are looking for.  The sports media is based on the East Coast and the leader in sports is ESPN, who has very few ties to West Coast teams.

When you think about it, there are few teams west of the Mississippi that get the attention they deserve.  You can usually count on Bob Stoop's Sooners or Pete Carroll's Trojans to garner and at times generate the coverage that the western side of the states deserves, but those programs have dominated the national scene for decades.  Which brings up the question, why would anyone suggest that USC is not as good as their record indicates?  The answer has more to do with the other nine schools in the Pac-10.

The BCS system takes quite a hit around this time of year.  You can easily find opinions knocking the system and clamouring for some sort of playoff system.  Unless you had a 32 team format including ALL conference winners and best records judged with tie-breaker rules, (not voting), you'd still be hearing cries for a better system.

I find it funny that the same pundits that made statements all year about the Pac-10 being down, are now posing the question about whether or not USC should've gotten national title consideration.  Silly fools.  Here's the breakdown on how each conference has fared during the bowl season through January 6, 2009:

I'm willing to stipulate that the SEC is the top conference in college football.  Until the Pac-10 and the SEC can have more games against each other, it's really only speculation.  Getting a Cal -vs- Tennessee game is not the same as playing Florida, but when you look at the SEC conference as a whole, it's hard not to wonder what all the fuss is over.  Florida is still Florida.  They are the USC of the SEC.  Alabama was beaten badly by 13-0 Utah (the real national champs) in the Sugar Bowl.  Mississippi and Georgia are the other two that had records over .500 in conference play.  I'm sure neither of those two teams strike any fear in the Cal Bears.

Here's my purely subjective, non-scientific, ranking of the major conferences with their top teams, not necessarily by record:

1. SEC - Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, LSU
2. Pac-10 - USC, Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Arizona
3. Big 12 - Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Missouri
4. MWC - Utah, TCU, BYU, Air Force, Colorado State
5. ACC - Fla. State, Boston College, Georgia Tech, Va. Tech, North Carolina
6. Big East - Cincinnati, Pitt, Rutgers, West Virginia
7. C-USA - Tulsa, Rice, East Carolina, Houston, Southern Miss
8. Big 10 - Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State, Iowa, Northwestern
9. WAC - Boise St., La. Tech, Nevada, Hawaii
10. Independents - Navy
11. Sun Belt - Troy
12. MAC - Ball State, Buffalo, Western Michigan

I ommitted most of the Sun Belt even though I believe that conference to be tougher than the MAC.  Overall, Troy is probably the only team that could still reach a bowl game in the Big 10.  The MAC is very weak, but I added Buffalo and Western Michigan based on what they've done over the past few years.  I ommitted Notre Dame due to the fact that their schedule loaded with patsies such as San Diego State, Washington, and Michigan is what enabled them to finish the season with a 6-6 record and make a bowl appearance.

As far as the SEC, Pac-10, and the Big 12 are concerned, in my opinion it's basically a was for superiority.  All three conferences could make the claim to being the top conference in college football, but this season the Pac-10 was so underrated that teams such as Oregon State and California were sorely robbed of better national rankings.

In the end, the Pac-10 took care of their competition from other conferences - most of them with ease.  Here's the breakdown:

The only team from the Pac-10 that didn't play a ranked opponent was Cal.  However the final rankings pan out, the Pac-10 could make a case for all five of these teams to be included rather than just the two (Oregon and USC) at the start of bowl play.  Until major sports outlets begin broadcasting from the West Coast, you can bet that this will continue to be an issue for Pac-10 schools.