Happy New Years Everyone!
by John Berkowitz on Jan 1, 2009 10:38 AM PST
Email
PrintI am sitting here with family watching the start of the NHL Winter Classic from Wrigley Field. I think the Winter Classic is a fantastic new tradition that will last till global warming finally overtakes the Great White North.
If you are tuning in you notice that all the buildings across from Wrigley are just packed. Chicago is a great place to take in a baseball game in the Summer but this is the first time the Winter Classic has been here. Looks like the temperature is just about right so the game should be a success.
New Years also means football and we plan to watch a few of those too.
Iowa is already pounding Steve Spurrier and South Carolina 24-0 in the third quarter of the Outback Bowl. In the other early game Michigan State and Georgia are tied 0-0 in the first quarter of the Capital One. Nebraska and Clemson just kicked off in the Gator Bowl.
The game of the day is the "Granddaddy of Them All" - The Rose Bowl. Steve Sarkisian will be on the sideline his final time as Pete Carroll's USC Trojans take on Joe Paterno and the Penn State Nittany Lions. I am picking the Trojans in this one.
The Orange Bowl is the traditional nightcap with Cincinnati taking on Virginia Tech. I haven't been too impressed witht either team this season because both conferences had a down years. I guess I take the Hokies.
Have a great time watching the games today and spending time with your families.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Vandeleigh Industries
How can someone stomach the Cincinnati vs. Va Tech Orange Bowl? This game is unwatchable. The Big East needs Penn State to be appealing again. Next year is Connecticut going to win the Big East and play in the Orange Bowl? Poach Penn State away from the Big 10 and lobby for Notre Dame to play football in the Big East as they do all other sports. Right now the Big East is horrible in regards to football. It’s not watchable.
After the Rose Bowl I have no option but to watch reruns of Seinfeld. “And you want to be my latex salesman?”
I don't think...
…either of those is going to happen. ND is sitting there fat dumb and happy with all of their money and national audience and Penn State would be stepping down in order to dominate the big least.
5 more hours
and the UW will have a full time coach. Husky football will be more exciting in January than it was in sep, oct and nov.
Concerning Big East football (a conference created by ESPN for BB), it has more football credibility than Man Made Global Warming. So JB, plan on watching the Winter Classic every year, except for U Dub Rose Bowl years!
Sarkisian and Recruiting
I will be glad when he is completely OURS!….Another thing I think we need is a tall wide receiver. I know we’re pretty stacked now so maybe just get another big tightend that is probably more of a need at this point. The kid they have now is more of an athlete and probably projects more as a linebacker.
Husky Pro Offense
I just had a thought. Isn’t it a good thing that Lappano kept some of those pro sets into the offensive scheme? I mean at Least Jake and company have some experience with running out of that formation vs being like Oregon and going exclusively with the spread.
It's all going to be scrapped
Everything that Lappano taught Jake is out the freakin’ window. As coach Sark mentioned Jake will enroll in Quarterback 101. Knowing Sark it will probably be a 12 credit course w/ 3 labs. Joking of course.
Yet I am not joking about Sark scrapping everything Jake was taught under Lappano. I’m quite certian Jake will get a tremendous amount of film study and his offseason training will consist of working on his footwork, fine tuning his accuracy, and studying the many available routes at his disposal. In a nutshell, Jake is going to be very busy up until Spring ball learning the how’s of the pro style QB. During the summer he’ll probably have his slate full again working on reading defense w/ a fine tooth comb.
And to add to your other entry… I think tall receivers are over rated. Indeed great for the fade in the endzone. But I’d take scrappy, fast wideouts that can run precise routes and have sticky hands over a tall and slow receiver. I think we can get by with our TEs.
Lappano etc.
No I think there is carry over and it’s a positive that some of that was taught. Tall receivers are the BOMB! and we could use some of those big bodies with their long arms. Have you ever tried to defend a guy like that? I have and it’s difficult to say the least! Further, just because a guy is tall doesn’t mean he’s slow. We definitely need at least one TE for depth and not to get caught in the “Gee I don’t know why we’re playing freshman” syndrome.
Defeating the Tall Receiver
Always play the ball and not the receiver. Also you can play more of a “cloud” coverage and give him a little cushion, but you have the spy the quick out.
If you play the ball in coverage you should be okay.
Unless the ball is thrown over your reach
It should be obviously that having both are ideal, you can’t beat a tall and fast receiver.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
Ideal but...
How many of those guys (tall, fast, hands) come around? One in 8 years? Pretty hard to recruit those guys huh?
And if it’s thrown over your head, you’ve got 2 deep coverage, meaning their is a safety ready to knock the 6-4 receiver into the ground. Play under and play over on big receivers. Not everybody has 4 or 5 of those guys like USC, so using double team technique will slow down the stud tall receiver. This isn’t rocket science, it’s football and can be fundamentally taught.
Everything I expected so far
USC looks like the top team in the country and the Pac-10 is likely going to end up 5-0 in bowl games. Their defense is really good and makes plays when they need to. It makes me wonder which is better, this years USC defense or the ‘91 Washington D. What do you guys think? Statistically USC’s is a little better in ypg and ppg which seems pretty significant since teams are scoring more in this era of college football than they did in the 90s.
84 and 91 UW
Both those units were better than what we are seeing today.
by John Berkowitz on Jan 1, 2009 4:25 PM PST up reply actions
91 Purple Haze
The two best defenses I’ve seen are the 85 Bears and the 91 Huskies. Not sure about the 84 Husky D although very impressive.
Sorry this isn’t even USC best defense. I may be alone on this one, but I think the Sean Cody-led defense was better then this USC unit. All world on the D Line, all world at LB, and all world in the secondary. And one of the best players on that defense I don’t think received All Pac 10 honors. Matt Goodegood (spelling?) was a great playmaker for that defense.
Defense is not alway about stats- I could careless about stats, because they are biased at best. Try comparing the talent USC played during that 02 national title run compared to this one. You can’t, can you?
At least Sark is now our fulltime head coach- WOOF!!!
No it was Purple Haze
It was coined as a play on words
1. Defense came at you in waves, swarms, and at every direction and to a QB (like Marniovich) everything seemed hazy. “All I saw was purple”
2. The amount of rainfall the Seattle-metro receives
But I am not sure I am spelling “haze” correctly. English majors?
PAC 10 Bowl Games
Is it just me, or does every PAC 10 fan wondered way our conference only has one New Years Day or later bowl game tie in. Every other BCS conference has at least two or three teams playing today or later. For God sakes, even the Big 10 had two teams play today and Ohio State tomorrow. It’s a joke that the PAC 10’s second place team plays in the Holiday Bowl and not on New Year’s Day like every other #2 conference team. PAC 10 leadership is a joke. My wish list is for a better bowl line up. While we’re dreaming, it would be nice to find two new teams, maybe Utah and BYU, and become the PAC 12. Won’t happen with this joke of a conference though; bowl line up, TV deal, etc.
P.S. My thoughts on the Rose Bowl. It sure will be nice to have actual offensive coaching and schemes next year.
This has been discussed a lot over the years. The short answer to the problem of the Pac-10 bowl matchups is “geography”. Yes, more visionary leadership from the Pac-10 Commissioner’s office would help, but keep in mind that position is overseen by the Pac-10 school Presidents.
It’s going to be tough to lure a higher-level opponent in the Holiday Bowl, and it’s problematic moving that game to New Year’s Day. It’s going to be difficult to land a high-level spot in another tough bowl.
It’s easy to complain about the Pac-10 bowl situation, but it’s much, much harder to solve once you really look at it.
I understand that it won’t be easy to “fix” this problem. Let’s just hope that with Hansen leaving that more visionary leadership at the PAC 10 will move us into the future. We pride ourselves in being on the the best football conferences in the county. Our bowl line up should reflect that. It’s time for the PAC 10 to move into the 21st century before it is left behind by other conferences.
Pac 10 Bowl Schedule
I suggest you email your complaints to retired Pac 10 commissioner, Tom Hansen. We’ve done a horrible job marketing the league. At least we’ve made some head way, finally we are getting showcased on ESPN. Our Fox contract was killing national exposure.
I would also like to become a super conference of 12 members. If we take in BYU and Utah, the Pac 10 would dominate college football West of the Rocky Mountains. Not to mention getting both Utah schools would ensure we continue our traditional in-state rivalry games.
Pac 12?
I know expansion has not been very popular with school presidents nor the commisioners office. But think of the possiblities. If the Pac 10 expanded to the Pac 12 by bringing in BYU and Utah, the league would dominate college football West of the Rocky Mountains. Now I know that isn’t the largest populated region in the country, but it would be huge involving television revenue out here. I like the bold move because it would still offer us our traditional in-state rivalry games. BYU vs. Utah is a big draw in the land of the bees.
How would the league be divided up? I have the perfect solution. A solution where both USC and Ucla would more or less be in a great position to win the hypothetical Pac 12 championship. We don’t divide them up geographically, we divide them up based upon their north/south relationship between the in-state rivaling schools.
Pac 12 North Division (Hypothetically)
1. UCLA (north of USC)
2. Washington (north of WSU)
3. Oregon State (north of Oregon)
4. California (north of Stanford)
5. Arizona State (north of Arizona)
6. Utah (north of BYU)
Pac 12 South Division (Hypothetically)
1. USC (south of Ucla)
2. Washington State (south of Washington)
3. Oregon (south of Oregon State)
4. Stanford (south of Cal)
5. Arizona (south of Arizona State)
6. BYU (south of Utah)
Regardless of division alignment the in-state rivaly games are played prior to the hypothetical Pac 12 championship game. Each division on paper looks strong (unlike the Big 12 north and south div.). And the two big boys would be content (USC & Ucla) because they aren’t aligned in the same division as well as the rest of the in-state schools.
The only problem is finding a suitable venue for a hypothetical Pac 12 championship game. At this point I suggest a site at San Diego. Not Pac 12 country, but great stadium and huge revenue for both the league and the city of San Diego. It would feel like a bowl game.
What do you think? The future is in super conferences. We’ve been stuck in the Pac 10 for too long. Everybody has expanded except us. Don’t feed me the Big 10 hasn’t expanded. Adding Penn State made it 11. Even the Big 10 logo says they have 11 members when it is awfully called the Big 10- sounds to me as if the Big 10 is sending a clear/cut message to Penn State- you are the step child, we need you only for revenue purposes but not for tradition. At least that is my understanding w/ the hidden message on the logo.
why are we splitting in state teams?
It wouldn’t make sense to split up in state by who is further north in the state they play. If you were going to align them you could have the below…(side note…I would rather add Utah and Boise than BYU, but I understand what John is saying about revenue)
North
UW
WSU
Boise
Oregon
OSU
Cal
South
UCLA
USC
Stanford
Arizona
ASU
Utah
Makes more sense to me at least…but i would like to hear your reasoning for your alignment above.
Assuming for a minute that the Pac-10 would consider expansion with Utah & Boise State (or BYU) – you’d have to keep all the California schools in the South division along with the Arizona schools and place the two newcomers in the “North” division. Cal wouldn’t stand for being split away from Stanford and the other California schools.
The other thing to consider here besides TV revenues and academic issues – other sports, especially basketball. Right now, the Pac-10 is one of the premier basketball conferences; would it help in any way to add Utah and a school like Boise or BYU?
If the Pac-10 could convince Colorado to bolt the Big-12, then I think there might be a possibility of expansion. But the Pac-10 is a conference of traditionalists, and I think the school presidents are fine with the status quo.
And another reason not to split states
Normally in a north, south set up the north would only play half of the south every year. What about rivals? Would we play WSU every other year? Of course not, so we would only play 2 teams of the south every year. Only seeing USC 1 out of every three years would be bad for business. Splitting states is a BAD idea.
bigdave’s set up is far better.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
A bad fit? Are you kidding me? BYU’s stadium seats 65,000 fans. That’s bigger then Autzen, Reser, and Martin. Also the mormon church is the 2nd largest religion in the nation. Talk about a HUGE fan base! And with them being Pac 10ers it would be huge for the league. BYU has gridiron history- a Heismen Trophy winner and a national championship.
Other reasons to consider BYU and Utah for expansion- Salt Lake City! decent market as well or better then Portland, OR in both cases of Oregon and Oregon State. A case for Utah? Are 2-0 in BCS bowl games. Both basketball programs are good- not great. If Rick Majarus was still coaching the Utes it would be a good basketball get, for he led the Utes to the NCAA Men’s College Basketball Championship Game.
I think adding both BYU and Utah is a no brainer. Would we want Hawaii, SDSU, Fresno, UNLV, Reno, or Boise? Anyone of those combinations we’d lose our historical in-state rivalry game matchups. Where are we going to go? Colorado and Colorado State? News flash: Colorado isn’t going to leave the Big 12.
I'm not kidding....
It is all about television sets my friend and Utah doesn’t have enough of them.
If the Pac 10 added Utah and BYU revenue would go down for each conference member. The only reason to expand is to increase revenue. When the ACC expanded they added enough TV sets for each member to make more money than before…a lot more money.
The Utah schools won’t do that for the Pac 10.
Think Texas and Colorado. The Pac 10 would do that in a second. Colorado and Utah? That would make more sense than Utah and BYU. Once again more TV sets.
As for BYU they are a bad fit academically. I could go on and on about all the reasons the Pac 10 doesn’t want them despite high attendance. The Pac 10 is an academic alliance first and an athletic conference second. Same thing with the Big 10.
Think television sets….that is where all the money comes from.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
