Happy Friday. Are you all March Mad? Or did you pick UCLA, Georgia State and UAB in your bracket?
But of course you did. You read the Pac-12 blog.
To the notes!
Greeny from Boston writes: You guys keep saying six Pac-12 teams are going to be ranked or should be ranked. give me a "buy/sell" on each team, just for argument's sake.
Ted Miller: You don't name the six teams, but I'm going to assume you refer to: Oregon, USC, UCLA, Arizona State, Arizona and Utah. My guess is at least five of those six start off ranked in the preseason polls. I'd also practically guarantee one of those six wins the conference and/or becomes the Pac-12's top College Football Playoff candidate.
So buy/sell?
Oregon
Buy: The Ducks might have the most dynamic collection of skill players in the country. Check that. They do have the most dynamic collection of skill players. And there's that recent track record, too.
Sell: While Eastern Washington transfer Vernon Adams might be the second coming of Saint Mariota, we tend to raise a skeptical eye in the Pac-12 when a team is uncertain at quarterback, not to mention replacing the best one in program history. And the defense has some questions.
USC
Buy: Topped by QB Cody Kessler, there's an impressive array of returning starters, both skill players and linemen. Hard not to like a team with five talented starting offensive linemen coming back.
Sell: Losing Leonard Williams is a big hit for the defense, and there are still depth concerns connected to now-completed NCAA sanctions. And, yes, there's some skepticism about whether Steve Sarkisian can build and maintain a team consistent enough to win championships.
UCLA
Buy: Just look at the depth chart. The Bruins have 18 starters coming back from a 10-3 team. That's the most returning starters in the conference and sixth-most in the nation.
Sell: Not only has UCLA lost Brett Hundley, a three-year starter at QB, the contenders to replace him inspire more questions -- at this point, at least -- than answers. Do you go with the hyped-but-green true freshman in Josh Rosen or the scrappy-but-less-physically-talented veteran in Jerry Neuheisel?
Arizona State
Buy: With nine returning starters, the defense should be much better, and quarterback Mike Bercovici provides an easy -- and better throwing -- answer behind center.
Sell: The defense should be better, but is it championship-level in terms of talent on all three levels? And while Bercovici might have a good arm, he doesn't have the strong group of receivers from 2014, a cautionary note made worse by the season-ending knee injury to wide receiver Cameron Smith this spring.
Arizona
Buy: Experience at QB, a 1,000-yard rusher, quality depth at receiver and the nation's best defensive player in Scooby Wright. What's not to like?
Sell: The offensive line takes three big hits and the defense remains questionable around Wright, particularly the secondary, which is replacing three multiyear starters.
Utah
Buy: Four offensive linemen return to make life easy for running back Devontae Booker, a dark-horse Heisman Trophy candidate, and the defense has nice talent coming back on all three levels. Oh, and the specialists, kicker Andy Phillips and punter Tom Hackett, were first-team All-Pac-12 last year.
Sell: There continues to be uncertainty at QB, even though Travis Wilson is vying to become a rare four-year starter, and the coaching upheaval that led to two new coordinators and a soured relationship between coach Kyle Whittingham and AD Chris Hill isn't easy to write off.
What conclusions can we draw from these superficial bits of analysis? Just words on a page, my friends. Those that prove true next December, we'll reproduce with Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" playing in the background. And those that prove false we'll hope you forget.
"Cordial Duck" from Carson City, Nevada, writes: Reading the defensive position breakdowns reminded me to ask: It seemed Washington's defense last year -- if there were truly three All-American defenders -- should have provided the Huskies with at least two more wins. I think any college defense with that level of talent should simply overwhelm about half the teams they play, then provide the stops to split the rest. Was this a case of good individual stats, but the teamwork wasn't there?
Ted Miller: Hmm... not sure Huskies would agree there are too many "Cordial Ducks" out there.
I do think the Huskies' defense should have been better in 2014. It shouldn't have yielded 52 points to Eastern Washington -- hey, Oregon! -- or 44 to UCLA or 30 to Oklahoma State. And I do think the Huskies should have won 10 games, just based on how they lost at home to Arizona and the faceplant they did against an inferior Oklahoma State team in the bowl game. I would imagine coordinator Pete Kwiatkowski doesn't feel like it was his best season, though keep in mind it was his first in the Pac-12.
Yet I have three counter-arguments: 1. The numbers actually were pretty darn good; 2. The secondary was really, really young and vulnerable, particularly after the dismissal of cornerback Marcus Peters; 3. The offense didn't provide much help.
As for the numbers, the Huskies ranked third in the Pac-12 in scoring defense, second in run defense, fourth in third-down defense and second in the nation in sacks. The notable weak number was pass-efficiency defense, but that speaks to No. 2, as the entire secondary was freshmen and sophomores, most of whom had no Pac-12 experience, in a year when the conference was flush with A-list quarterbacks.
As for the offense, Husky fans can pick their favorite adjectives.
Further, a defense that has a couple of superstars sometimes suffers from, "He'll Save Us Syndrome," and that might have hit the Huskies on occasion. I can't quantify or even point to specific instances -- any help here, Huskies? -- but it's possible the other eight guys, at times, waited on Danny Shelton, Hau'oli Kikaha or Shaq Thompson to make a play instead of applying their 100-percent focused intensity on doing their jobs.
Dimond Mike from Oakland writes: I think the blog has given Jared Goff plenty of love, but as a fan who has seen the real deal (Aaron Rodgers) and poseur (Kyle Boller), Jared Goff is a no-doubt-about-it starting NFL QB in years to come. He'll have the numbers to back it up, so shouldn't that get him on more national radars, or is it solely about getting 10-plus wins?
Ted Miller: Are you starting the "Dimond Mike Says So!" campaign in advance of the season in anticipation of following up with the "Dimond Mike Told You So!" bacchanalia?
I think: 1. Goff has a future as an NFL starter; 2. He will put up big numbers next fall as a junior and position himself to be a first-day NFL draft pick.
If NFL prospects are what you are referring to when you say "national radar," those are already there. If you are talking about All-American honors and other sorts of college football trophies, he has to put up big numbers for a Cal team that's winning.
The Bears might not need to become national contenders for Goff to get attention for major awards, but I doubt a 7-5 season would help him at the ballot box. Just the way these things work in college.
Addison from Washington, D.C., writes: I've enjoyed your spring breakdowns by position. Who do you think is going to be the offensive and defensive players of the year next season?
Ted Miller: Kevin already took on this question in his mailbag, but why should he have all the fun?
Offensively, I think USC QB Cody Kessler is the front-runner, though I've got a jones to go with Utah's Booker.
Defensively, you start with defending champion Wright, who has the sort of makeup to be motivated by those who wonder what the heck he could do for an encore. You also have to mention UCLA linebacker Myles Jack, USC linebacker Su'a Cravens or Oregon defensive end DeForest Buckner.
But you want to know whom I believe is the darkhorse Heisman candidate no one is talking about? USC defensive back/wide receiver Adoree' Jackson. If he gets consistent reps on both sides of the ball, not to mention as a return man, he could become a human-highlight film, apologies to Dominique Wilkins.