Mail+bag= fun, fun, fun.
Many questions from many people: (My team) has a bowl scenario that involves (this team) (that team) (the other team) and if (the other team) beats (that team) and (my team) wins out, what will happen?
Kevin Gemmell: Lots, and lots of these types of questions. First and foremost is the Stanford to a BCS game question. Stanford’s chances aren’t shot by any means. If they close out the year with two losses, they’ll still be ranked in the top 10.
The question is, will there be a spot available to them? You have to worry about a UCF or Fresno State taking an at-large spot away from a BCS conference team – which isn’t to say they didn’t earn it, that’s just the reality of the system.
I think a Stanford team with two losses and a strong resume would be appealing. The only problem is both of those losses came against unranked teams. They were on the road, which eases the pain a little – but they are unranked nevertheless.
But the Cardinal put themselves in the position David Shaw didn’t want to be in – someone else deciding their fate for them. If they sneak into one of the BCS bowls, it would be a nice boost for the conference. If not, the Alamo is always pretty this time of year.
As for all of the other scenarios, let’s just wait and see how everything plays out. Three weeks ago we were convinced Oregon was going to the national championship game. Two weeks ago we were confident there were going to be two BCS bowl teams with Stanford and Oregon. Last week we had written USC out of the South.
Crazy things have been known to happen around Thanksgiving. We’ll see if this year follows suit.
Anonymous Husky fan writes: Husky fan here... I'm fully disappointed with this season and will consider it a failure even if we win our next two games and bowl game to finish 9-4. That's not good enough.
Kevin Gemmell: That’s fair. Though I think eight regular season wins and a potential ninth win in a bowl game would be considered a step forward for the program. I’m not saying you shouldn’t have high hopes. Because you should.
I felt coming into the season that Washington was anywhere from an eight- to 10-win team. They could have gotten to 10 wins if some of those 50-50 road games went their way. As it stands, they lost a pair of those to Arizona State and UCLA. Two very good teams, mind you.
Essentially they have won the games they are supposed to win, lost the games we figured they’d lose, and went 0-for-2 on a couple of the toss ups. Ted and I both tabbed Washington as the No. 3 team in the North. The next two weeks will go a long way toward finalizing that pecking order.
As for your final sentence – not good enough – I guess the question is what is good enough? 10 wins? A conference championship? A national championship? All of those things would be fan-diddly-tastic, but as Oregon and Stanford will tell you, that’s all kinds of tough to accomplish when you play in the Pac-12 and play a nine-game conference schedule.
I’m not saying this season has been a massive success for the Huskies. That ending is yet to be written. But if they close the year with nine wins, I don’t think you can call it a failure.
Jeremy in Seattle writes: Hi kev, do you happen to know if the bowls will be crowded this year? Is it possible a 6-6 Pac 12 team, whether it be Arizona, Utah, Oregon state, Washington state, Colorado, or, god forbid, Washington, not get to a bowl?
Kevin Gemmell: The bowls are almost always crowded. There are plenty of teams capable of six wins.
I think we first need to see what happens with the BCS. A second BCS team pulls everyone up one spot, which is obviously beneficial for the bottom of the conference.
By my count, there are 66 bowl eligible teams heading into this week for 70 spots. However, all of those teams you mentioned have the simple fact that they are in the Pac-12 going for them. Bowl organizers that are looking for replacement teams are going to look favorably on major conference teams – especially major conference teams that travel well.
By the way, you can see where Mark Schlabach and Brad Edwards are projecting teams.
For the Utahs and Washington States of the world, my best advice involves a cart and a horse. Get there first, then worry about where there actually is.
00006shy in Los Angeles writes: kevin, on the day of kiffin's firing, i was excited about the opportunity to get a "big name" coach. today, i think we should keep coach o. and it looks like more and more usc fans are starting to agree. at this point, if haden doesn't hire coach o, how big a name does he need to get in order to avoid a revolt? will anything less than snatching gruden or returning vince lombardi from the dead cut it?
Kevin Gemmell: Let’s see how they finish out the year before throwing a contract Ed Orgeron’s way. Will you be singing the same tune if they stumble at Colorado and/or get smacked down by UCLA?
I think Pat Haden has played this perfectly. He said from the beginning he’s going to give the job its due diligence and not going to rush to any decisions.
The more Orgeron wins, the more he pads his resume. But he also makes the program that much more attractive should an NFLer swoop in and take the gig. Six weeks ago, it was a USC team in shambles. Now it’s a top 25 program that chops down trees and can win in the clutch. In establishing his own credentials for the job, Orgeron may have piqued the interest of bigger names on the fence about taking over a sub.-500 team that smelled like Traveler’s backside.
I absolutely think Orgeron should continue to be considered for the job. We know he can recruit nationally. And right now it’s a heck of a story. These guys will eat glass for him, so long as they get cookies, burgers and shakes afterwards. They are playing inspired defense and efficient offense. From a selfish, media standpoint, I love talking to the guy, so I hope he stays in the running.
But I wouldn’t stamp it yet, and Haden shouldn’t either. Let’s see how these next two weeks play out. But if he doesn’t get the job, whoever the new guy is, his first order of business should be locking Orgeron in for a very long time.
The CEO at the McKay Center writes: Kevin, should I clear a spot on my mantel for the "Pac 12 Coach of the Year" trophy?
Kevin Gemmell: Interesting. Very, very interesting. He’s undefeated against the Pac-12. If they close the year 7-0 against the Pac-12 with Orgeron as the head coach – which includes wins over ranked Stanford and UCLA, maybe? It honestly hadn’t crossed my mind until you brought it up. I just didn’t think about it because five games were already in the books.
Let’s think about this for a second. Obvious choices: Mark Helfrich, Todd Graham or Jim Mora. Helfrich has the Stanford loss, but his team has the best chance of going on to win the conference. I think if Graham goes on to win the South and is competitive in the title game, or wins the conference, he should be a lock. Same for Mora, who I believe has done phenomenal work considering the off-the-field tragedy his team has had to deal with.
I think David Shaw’s streak of two in a row comes to an end with losses to unranked teams.
But, sure, why not Ed? I don’t have a vote. But I’d think long and hard about that one.
ESPN Commentator, Head in the Clouds: Hello, fellow ESPN employee! Did you see Myles Jack on Friday! I did and it was a spiritual experience. He's like the second coming of Jesus combined with Bo Jackson! He's the best player ever! I mean, his 59 yards SHATTERED the NCAA record for rushing in a game, and his TD runs of 8, 1, 1, and 2 yards represent the BEST running work of any player since the invention of the forward pass. The football season is no longer important as we have seen the effort for the ages. Nothing any player, especially, Manziel, Mariota, or Winston has put up this year compares the Jack's Quintuple Heisman-worthy performance! Jack for President, 2016!
Kevin Gemmell: I don’t want to speculate who sent in this particular email. But I think I have an idea based on the language, tone etc. After two and a half years, I’ve learned a little something about you guys.
I get your point. Yes, I did see the game Friday night from a bar in Columbia, South Carolina. Strangely enough, I was the only one watching.
No, I don’t think Myles Jack should be getting Heisman buzz. But yes, I do believe the excitement level is warranted.
In the last two weeks he’s turned in two of the most spectacular iron man performances in recent memory. From a pure athleticism standpoint, it’s remarkably impressive.
He’s now tied for second on the team with rushing touchdowns with five and among Bruins with at least 17 carries, he leads the team with 9.4 yards per rush.
And he’s a pretty freaking good linebacker to boot. I get that the commentary might have seemed over the top. But at the same time, dude, did you see the game?
Nick in LaLaLand writes: Hello again Kevin! I hope your stay in SEC country was filled with biscuits and gravy, polite Southern folk, and fun football. A couple of weeks ago i wrote about Pac-12 refs and how many times obvious calls seem to be missed, inexplicably. You responded with a valid point: the speed of the game in the conference can make it difficult for refs to keep up sometimes. One call at the USC-Stanford game the other night though seemed like a no brainer, and the speed of the game is no excuse in this case. The phantom first down call--what gives? It's a moot point now, but this isn't the first time, in general, I’ve seen this in football. Is the end of the chain the first down or does the ball have to completely go past the pole? But goodness heck of a game. Glad this is a mailbag and not an answering machine since I have no voice!
Kevin Gemmell: My time at USC was awesome. (Yes, they made me call it USC, while referring to our USC as Southern Cal). Great people. Great hospitality. Chicken-fried everything. I even tried fried gator (it's like a chicken and calamari consummated their union in a vat of boiling oil). We’ll be stringing together all sorts of fun experiences from our trips abroad in the next few weeks, so keep an eye on the blogs.
I DVR’d all the Pac-12 games and have spent the last 24 hours playing catchup. I have no explanation for the first-down measurement. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
First down? pic.twitter.com/qPAEMNwelr
— Kyle Bonagura (@KyleBonagura) November 17, 2013