Fresno, UCLA & USC - week 1 view

[Ma'ake]

I thought Fresno looked credible vs a revamped SC early, but Sarkisian has USC playing pretty well, right out of the gate, and the yearly USC cleanup in recruiting was on full display like it typically has not been.

Fresno's coach is a veteran, they had a great year last year, they play USC, then us, then Nebraska in Fresno, 1-2-3. Fresno will be ready, but if there's a chance we can get up on them, I think they'll sag, under the cold, hard realization that P5 football is a lot different than MWC football. I really, really hope we don't make it a game with them. Step on their neck and don't let up.

UCLA looked very average vs Virginia. Maybe they're not heads & shoulder above in talent, maybe we can give them a real fight in the Rose Bowl next month.

USC is loaded, and they were very, very amped to put on a show. I'm still hoping that they'll start to get worn down a bit when we play them, but based on today, I think our best chance of beating an LA division mate will be UCLA.

Wazzu's fans are very, very unhappy, talking about the honeymoon is over, a pitiful defense, etc. Oregon State flirted around with their FCS team and then ended up 2 TDs. If we really are better than last year, we should beat Wazzu and the Beavers.

[UTEopia]

I guess if I had to rank the Pac 12 after 1 week, this is how I would have it. This is not how I would predict the teams to finish, just where I see them based on performance and opposition.

USC - Despite the score, I still believe that Fresno was a good team and possibly the best team a Pac 12 team faced in week 1.
UCLA - Also despite the score, on the road against a P5 team is a good win.
Cal - Impressive to go into Big 10 country and get the win. They looked much improved.
Arizona - UNLV is not a good team, but it is an FBS team.
Oregon - Did what they should have done.
Stanford - See Oregon
ASU - See Oregon
Utah - See Oregon
Washington - eked out a win on the road against the fighting Chow's.
Oregon St. - A W is a W, but they did not dominate. Pretty consistent opening game for Oregon St.
Wash. St. - terrible on defense and terrible running the ball.
CU - surprised they lost after all the hype of them being the most improved team.

[Ma'ake]

I think Virginia is improved, but their offense (from what I saw) has big, but not particularly mobile WRs, a lot like us last year, and UCLA clamped down on them when it was needed... the bad movie we all went through last year, too often.

We absolutely need to exploit the improved level of athleticism we recruited, and we need to get the lines improved - which I think will happen.

Fresno showed a lot more of what they're capable of doing than we did, and we'll have the benefit of better preparation material. I'm glad we get the BYE after Fresno to really fill out the offense and get the defensive areas tightened up, but we've got to take a step up and get the win vs Fresno. Beggars can't be choosers, and I'll take whatever kind of win we can get, but it would be nice to get a confidence booster vs an upper level G5 team on Saturday.

We damn well better beat the last three teams in our league, and fortunately we play them all. When I read about CU's game, I thought "if Liafau and Spruce are their offensive studs, they're just not very good". They'll get better, I'm presuming, but if we don't win in Boulder...

I'd gladly take a butt-kicking at Stanford in exchange for a tossup win, perhaps at UCLA or ASU, or a win vs Oregon or USC at home. Trying to project the "eye-ball test talent" we saw on Thursday, I think we'll get to six wins, perhaps even seven. If there is a way we can win on Saturday and then get a W at Ann Arbor two weeks later, things would be extraordinarily nice.

If we start PAC play at 2-1, I'll be OK with it. If we go to Corvalis at 3-2, I think we'll be OK.

Lady luck needs to bounce our way this year, especially after those three blown games at home, last year. Last year's backup QB is now #5 on the depth chart.

[LA Ute]

Lady luck needs to bounce our way this year, especially after those three blown games at home, last year. Last year's backup QB is now #5 on the depth chart.

:highfive:

[jrj84105]

I still didn't see much out of the slot receiver position. I'm not sold on McClellan. I like our first three receiving options in Dres, Scott, and Tonga. I hope we have something creative up our sleeves to get that speed in space. We moved McCormick into the slot once and TW missed the connection, but I'd like to see more of that. Motioning McCormick, McClellan, or Clay from the slot to the backfield on fly sweeps or as a second back on the option would add a nice element of misdirection to the offense.

[SigmaUte]

I still didn't see much out of the slot receiver position. I'm not sold on McClellan. I like our first three receiving options in Dres, Scott, and Tonga. I hope we have something creative up our sleeves to get that speed in space. We moved McCormick into the slot once and TW missed the connection, but I'd like to see more of that. Motioning McCormick, McClellan, or Clay from the slot to the backfield on fly sweeps or as a second back on the option would add a nice element of misdirection to the offense.

Whatever happened to Tim Patrick? I thought he was supposed to start?

[Ma'ake]

Whatever happened to Tim Patrick? I thought he was supposed to start?

I was a little surprised to see McClellon start, but if he stepped up in the competition for snaps, great. He's the fastest WR, and if he can do what it takes to hold down a starting position, fantastic. If opposing defenses try to cover him with a backer, or even a lot of safeties, the speed mismatch is pretty severe, which could be really effective on drag routes across the middle, and/or as a second or third option.

I thought Patrick looked very good, except on the long post route he should have laid out with two hands instead of trying to one-hand it. But I'd prefer that kind of effort against anyone else on our schedule, not the Bengals. If he had ripped up a shoulder against ISU, it would have really sucked.