A season-ending look at the Pac-10

[brady_44]

Just read A season-ending look at the Pac-10 and don'tknow what to make of it. I don't think the Pac-10 was mediocre this year in a lot of respects, but I see where they are coming from. I don't get however, how Pac 10 teams can beat up on each other and be mediocre, yet the SEC can do it and be the best conference. Anyway, I did like the outlook he gave for 2007.

• Seven teams welcome back their starting quarterback (not Oregon State, Washington and Stanford). Experience at quarterback is critical for any team, but particularly in the pass-happy Pac-10.

• The top 15 rushers are all scheduled to return (though Cal junior Marshawn Lynch figures to enter the NFL draft).

• Only three of the top 10 receivers are seniors (though USC junior Dwayne Jarrett figures to enter the NFL draft).

• USC and UCLA, the top two defenses in 2006, both lose only one starter for those units.

• UCLA presently starts just three seniors; Arizona also three; USC just four.

• USC, California, Oregon and UCLA should be ranked in the 2007 preseason poll. Arizona, Arizona State and Oregon State will receive votes.

• If Lynch and Jarrett don't return, USC quarterback John David Booty, Oregon tailback Jonathan Stewart, Cal quarterback Nate Longshore and Cal receiver wide receiver DeSean Jackson will be leading Heisman Trophy candidates.

So 2006's disappointment might be merely a prelude to riches in 2007.

[BruinNV]

The Pac 10 teams were all inconsistent this season which I think you can chalk up to youth at QB. Top-to-bottom the best? Well, you can't scrape the bottom much more than Stanford. Cal underachieved. Road wins were a rarity (except at Palo Alto). Every team, including even Stanford, will be better next season. We'll have to see how all these supposedly mediocre teams perform in their bowl games to determine if that statement sticks.