clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Midweek Debate: The Pac-12

New, 37 comments

We're gaining more data on these teams. The picture is coming clearer all the time, though there are still a ton of questions around the conference.

Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

We're two weeks into the season, and we've learned quite a bit about these teams.

Oregon State looks terrible. Cal and Colorado are adjusting to new coaches and have shown flashes. USC is even worse than some feared. Oregon has beaten two less than quality opponents, but looked like Oregon in doing so. WSU looks to actually have a defense, though rumors of Mike Leach being an offensive guru seem to have been greatly exaggerated. ASU and Stanford did what they were supposed to against Sacramento State and SJSU respectively. Utah looks much improved from their performance last season. Arizona has waxed two opponents like they should have, playing what is perhaps the weakest schedule of any team in the country. UCLA won decisively against a solid opponent in Nevada. And of course, the Huskies destroyed Boise State.

Last week we asked if the game against Boise State has changed your expectations for the Huskies, this week the question is similar: Has the initial two weeks cause you to change how you see the conference shaking out?

The obvious change is in the Pac-12 South, where I'm sure those idiots who picked USC to compete for the division title (guilty) are reevaluating that decision as the team and fans are giving up on Lane Kiffin.

Does it look to you like WSU could be a top-4 team in the North?

Who has the edge, UCLA or Arizona State?

Can Colorado with a healthy Paul Richardson surprise a Pac-12 opponent this season?

Does Jared Goff's arm fall off from overuse at some point this year?

What has been answered for you thus far in the season, and what questions do you still have?