2007 Pac 10 football thread

[rwperu34]

[ QUOTE ]
*sigh*

Stanford, yadda yadda yadda. Moving on. The championship talk regarding Oregon was valid, with Dixon healthy they were probably the best team in the country at that point who hadn't already played their way out of the title hunt. You'll notice that when Dixon got hurt and the Ducks were suddenly out of the hunt, all that conversation stopped. The injury was unfortunate, and a shame, and it cost us a shot at the national championship, but at least we understand that injuries are a part of the game and with the injury we are out of the hunt. No Oregon fans would have claimed (even before today's loss) that "We were without Dixon against Arizona so it shouldn't keep us out of the title game." A loss is still a loss, and when you have two of them you don't play for the title, especially if one of them is to Arizona or Stanford.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Nobody is claiming that USC should play for the title, I don't think. I just don't think the Ducks are as talented as USC. It's by like 15 points if you take the QB out of the equation. Of course USC played their way out early. The Stanford loss was damning and Oregon State sealed the deal. This is the exact reason I don't want a playoff in college football, because if there was one, USC would win 40% of the time and they have very clearly not had the best year (although four more wins would make it close).

For the poster above you, ASU did not lose to an injured Oregon, and USC was less injured than ASU.

Now, on to business. What are the chances that UCLA can pull off the miracle next week? I wanna go to Passadena!