[socalstanfan1]

Boy do I have mixed feelings as I think about this performance by USC. 

On the one hand, my first response was: "Couldn't happen to a more deserving program and coach."  I can't stand the arrogance of that entire program, the sense of entitlement that runs through so many of their comments; their belief that winning the Pac-12 is a birthright.  And watching and listening to Lame Kitten frankly makes me quite literally sick to my stomach. So part of me, a big part of me, loves this.

But, as much as I hate USC, I don't think it does the Pac-12 any good to have its most recognizable program (nationally) publicly throw up on itself.  Coming as it does near the end of what has been a disappointing bowl season for the Pac-12, I can almost hear the pundits already, proclaiming: well, I guess the Pac-12 isn't as good as we thought it was.  And, by extension: "Well, I guess Stanford won in a down year."  It doesn't take much to wind up the "nattering nabobs of negativity" (to quote a disgraced politician of the past), when it comes to running down Stanford's achievements in football.

Now, I think that is not fair.  Winning in Oregon, defeating USC when they were fully armed (with Barkley), defeating UCLA twice (though that win took a blow when UCLA was destroyed by Baylor), taking down Oregon State (which choked against Texas!), still count as excellent wins.  But I want to beat USC when it is good, not when it is a national joke.  I want to beat Oregon when it is running on all cylinders (as it was this year), not if Chip Kelly goes to the NFL and the Oregon program, perhaps, takes a step back.  I want the Pac-12 to be seen as a serious conference when we build a nerd dynasty. 

[socalstanfan1]

Boy do I have mixed feelings as I think about this performance by USC. 

On the one hand, my first response was: "Couldn't happen to a more deserving program and coach."  I can't stand the arrogance of that entire program, the sense of entitlement that runs through so many of their comments; their belief that winning the Pac-12 is a birthright.  And watching and listening to Lame Kitten frankly makes me quite literally sick to my stomach. So part of me, a big part of me, loves this.

But, as much as I hate USC, I don't think it does the Pac-12 any good to have its most recognizable program (nationally) publicly throw up on itself.  Coming as it does near the end of what has been a disappointing bowl season for the Pac-12, I can almost hear the pundits already, proclaiming: well, I guess the Pac-12 isn't as good as we thought it was.  And, by extension: "Well, I guess Stanford won in a down year."  It doesn't take much to wind up the "nattering nabobs of negativity" (to quote a disgraced politician of the past), when it comes to running down Stanford's achievements in football.

Now, I think that is not fair.  Winning in Oregon, defeating USC when they were fully armed (with Barkley), defeating UCLA twice (though that win took a blow when UCLA was destroyed by Baylor), taking down Oregon State (which choked against Texas!), still count as excellent wins.  But I want to beat USC when it is good, not when it is a national joke.  I want to beat Oregon when it is running on all cylinders (as it was this year), not if Chip Kelly goes to the NFL and the Oregon program, perhaps, takes a step back.  I want the Pac-12 to be seen as a serious conference when we build a nerd dynasty.