how about l.s.u. trades schedules with oregon state, and oregon trades schedules w/ old miss for next year's college football season ...

now, i think it is a pretty correct assertion that louisiana state u. and u. of alabama are probably the two best teams in college football.  i really have very little difficulty with two teams from the same conference playing for the national championship.

they earned it.

and, i have no sour grapes that u. of oregon will not be in the championship game, because if only they had beaten u. of southern california as they should have, they might be in it.  as it is, oregon will likely be in the rose bowl, with a good opponent, and that will be a good game.  it is enough for a pacific northwest lad, such as myself.

but, i do get tired of those mullet heads who are always claiming that no one can play with the s.e.c. with this, i do not agree.  the s.e.c. gets the good records from scheduling sacrificial lambs at the start of the year, the whole s.e.c. beating the bejesus out of the louisana-hyphens, e.g., louisana-monroe, louisana-lafayette, louisana tech, tennessee-martin, and the eastern, western, south east western tennessees.  and, we cannot leave out the ohio little sisters of the poor, as a dependable patsy.  the south eastern conference even schedules a patsy towards the last two weeks of the season, as a bit of a breather, and time to heal up, before the big rivalry game to end the season.  (in oregon, that last game is called "the civil war," which it used to resemble.  no jersey went unbloodied, when i was a lad and cheering on the beavers.)

now, louisiana state went through the year undefeated on that type schedule, and playing in a conference division that included alabama and arkansas ...  a pretty tough row to hoe.  but, the s.e.c. despite 3 or 4 stalwarts also has a host of conference patsies that the big guys feast on year in and year out, with predictable and boring regularity.

this is my contention.--

i don't think that the big three of the s.e.c./west would get through a pac-12 conference schedule unbeaten.  oh, they would do well, they are wonderful teams, and as i said, louisiana state and alabama deserve to be considered the top college teams in the nation.  no quibbles there.  none.

i just don't think that they would get through the pac-12 unscathed, as i think that there are three teams in the pac-12 that could be depended upon to give them very stern tests, to include oregon, usc and stanford.  i think that they would be good enough to take a notch or two out of the best of the s.e.c.  and, i think the balance of the pac-12 teams are better than the balance of the s.e.c. teams, in general.

let's find out.  this is what i suggest.--

i propose that l.s.u., the probable champ of the s.e.c. simply trade schedules with oregon state university, which will finish near the bottom of the pac-12 this year.  in other words, oregon state plays all of l.s.u.'s scheduled opponents, and vice versa for l.s.u.

and, that oregon, the probable champ of the pac-12, simply trade schedules with old miss, one of the more woeful of the s.e.c. teams.  oregon state plays the schedule of the old missus, and the old school marm plays oregon's schedule.

(i can guarantee you, that pac-12 and western teams play tougher pre-season games, though they, too, play teams paying them "guarantee money" to lure them to their defeats, so that the pac-12 teams may pad their records w/ wins, to impress the computers & fans.)

let's see if louisiana state could waltz through a schedule filled with oregon, stanford, and u.s.c., as well as contending with the occasional very good teams from arizona state, utah and university of washington.   let's see if oregon is made of enough "quality stuff" to play louisiana state's usual opponents, and to come out of it unscathed (which i doubt), or with at least a very good record, (which i suspect.)

let's find out.  i will never get the chance of bedding some little hollywood starlet, to find out if the experience is qualitatively different from any other that i have ever had, so at least one of the great curiosities of life will never be answered me.  and, as ben franklin observed, i will find out if jesus is the son of god soon enough, but, unfortunately, not with any surety on this side of the puzzle.

so, it would please me very much, and humor me even more, if i could find out and satisfy this little curiosity (and, my own little conceit), about whether the pac-12 could play an entire schedule head to head and nose to nose with the s.e.c. teams.

john jay @  11.25.2011

p.s.  we could do this over a two or three year period, ... , say the year after the pairing discussed above, u.s.c. and kentucky swap, and utah and alabama swap schedules, perhaps followed the year after by stanford and mississippi state swapping, and georgia and washington state.

and, so on and so forth.

i think it would be fascinating, and perhaps shed a little light on all the rather unproductive heat that swirls around the arguments of fans.  for this reason alone it would be worth it, and, for this reason alone, it will never happen.

Comments

[NavyOne]

I am a Pac-12 fan (Cal) and I agree with your conclusion. . .

[Mike]

I really enjoy your blog, but this post is just nuts. Full disclosure, I'm a life-long Kentuckian and a UK fan. Still, can you really believe what you've said? How many consecutive national championships will it take to get you to see the light?

My team (football anyway, not our #1 ranked basketball team) is a constant bottom-feeder in the SEC and would be in the Pac-12. But to think that Bama, LSU, and typically Florida, Georgia and Auburn wouldn't go through that conference like a hot knife through butter in most years is simply clueless.

As for creampuff OOC games, the SEC doesn't have the market cornered on those. Let's see --Oregon played Missouri St. and Stanford played San Jose St. USC (who I happen to think is the real #3 team in the country) squeaked by Minnesota at home and beat Syracuse.

Again, I really enjoy your blog but this time you're simply wrong.

[john jay]

mike:

over history pac-10/12 teams have done pretty well against s.e.c. competition. and, in the bowls.

some years ago, when dennis erikson was coach at oregon state he took the beavs down to play l.s.u., and they were pretty good.

l.s.u. won the game, in the last moments with a stirring comeback, but only because oregon state's freshman place kicker, in his first college game, missed a couple field goals at chip shot range, late if i recall correctly.

that is part of the game. you dance w/ the girl what brung you. no excuses.

but, it points out the nature of college football. just like last year, when auburn beat the ducks with a little smile from the almighty, late, and when auburn got a little extra time when kentucky should have beat them.

and, dear friend, i would hardly consider myself clueless in these matters. laughing.

fact is, auburn was national champs last year on a pretty thin thread.

no college football team is invincible. we have a little saying out my way, n.e. oregon, goes like this, "never was a horse couldn't be rode, never was a cowboy, couldn't be throwed."

come on back, and let's see what's on your mind.

john jay

p.s. this year, bama and lsu would do well against a pac-12 schedule, but no hot butter games against oregon, stanford, and u.s.c. this year, florida, georgia and auburn would be beaten, as well as s. carolina and arkansas. would those teams also win some games.

you betcha. how many, and against whom, remains to be seen.

[Mike]

John:

My apologies. I did not give you enough credit. I am impressed that you knew or remembered that Auburn barely escaped UK's comeback bid.

I suppose I just get more than a little frustrated hearing the same old weak non-conference schedule argument. Probably the same way you get tired of hearing how the SEC is the best conference in the country.

No doubt that the SEC is very top heavy this year and really weak at the bottom, but not really any more so than the Pac-12.

Just for the fun of it, I'll match-up the teams this year.
LSU v. Stanford: Edge LSU
Bama v. Oregon: Edge Bama
Arkansas v. USC: Edge USC
Georgia v. Washington: Edge UGa
USCjr (So. Carolina derisively around here) v. UCLA: Edge So. Carolina
Florida v. Cal: Edge? No clue . . . I'll give it to Cal
Auburn v. Arizona St.: Edge Auburn (simply because of the typical late-season ASU meltdown and Erikson's firing
Vandy v. Utah: Edge? Close one, but I'll go with Utah
Miss. St. v. Oregon St.: Edge Miss. St. (sorry on this one)
UK v. WSU: Edge? Who cares? I'll go with WSU --at least they won a road conference game
Tennessee v. Colorado: Edge? My guess is that they'd both find a way to lose. This looks like a toss-up.
Ole Miss v. Arizona: Edge Arizona (Ole Miss is truly awful)

So in my subjective opinion the SEC would win 7 the Pac-12 would win 4 and there's one toss-up with the SEC winning all of the top games. This is just one year, but I think it's fairly typical.

I truly don't mean that as any kind of a slam. In fact, I think that is by far better than any other conference would do (Big 12 is probably fairly comparable). However, the SEC only has one truly great academic institution --Vandy, whereas the Pac-12 has several excellent and well-rounded universities and then . . . well, they have Arizona St.

Anyway, my apologies on calling you "nuts" and "clueless." On that sir, I am definitely wrong.

[john jay]

mike:

no apologies necessary.

i'd go this way:
lsu vs. oregon: toss up.
(give the home team about a touch down, either way.)

bama vs. stanford: toss up. both very physical, stanford secondary suspect, bama passing game not that great.

usc vs. arkansas: toss up.

georgia vs. washington: edge to georgia, depending upon which georgia team shows up, which washington team shows up. both teams a bit "flighty."

south carolina vs. california: edge to s. carolina, though i think them overrated a bit.

florida vs. ucla: ucla is a very odd team, playing way below talent level. florida tends to be that way, too. but, i wouldn't bet my lunch money on ucla. they don't appear to have much heart.

auburn vs. arizon state: similar. both o.k. the first half, folded the second half. edge to auburn, but arizona state would have won the first of the season. i don't know what happened to 'em down the stretch.

vandy vs. utah. agreed. although utah a bit "undependable," for some odd reason.

miss state vs. oregon state: a "normal year," oregon state, but this is a down year, so reluctantly, i agree.

uk vs. wsu: probably wsu, but, again, hanging on to my lunch money.

tennessee v. colorado: tennessee.

ole miss vs. arizona: arizona is pretty bad, too. toss up.

oregon and stanford are very very very good teams, as are lsu and bama. maybe lsu gets an extra very.

usc is very good, as is arkansas. arkansas strikes early, usc beats you down late.

pretty even like this. in my view, of course.

to me, the intriguing match up is oregon vs. lsu. the thing i like about lsu is that they want to win very badly, and play with great intensity, each game. oregon, a little bit of a head case team, maybe a bit reluctant to be as good as they can be. if oregon played every game like they play stanford, tough for anyone to beat. if oregon played every game like they play lsu and u.s.c., they would have have another loss to cal and perhaps arizona state (both of whom could have been really good football teams, but weren't, for some reason.)

but, this discussion is why they play the games.

i would love to see more games between the two conferences, as to my mind, they play the most interesting and most varied football of any two conferences in the country.

i am not knocking the big ten, but they are very similar in schemes and approaches, the only really interesting games this year involving ohio state's losses.

i think the big 12 thoroughly overrated. and, i think the mac & sun belt better than the big east and the acc. well, maybe i exaggerate here, a bit. laughing.

but, i think the s.e.c. the top conference, the pac-12 next because of better strength in the middle teams, and the big 12 the next.

after that, not much to choose.

john jay