[stupac2]

It is true that if Washington has a lower winning percentage in the conference than we do, we would win the North championship. So, if Washington lost to Utah and another PAC-12 school, North or South, while we lost only to Washington, we are the North champion. However, in that scenario, we probably aren't getting into the final group of four anyway. I guess we could sneak in if the B1G and/or Big-12 champion also had a loss, but with the anti-PAC12 bias, it is far from a sure thing. I guess I am valuing the "ephemeral" advantage of beating a 1 loss Washington team as the only way we can get into the "final four".

Right, that's what I'm saying. If you think we're playoff caliber (jury's out on that IMO), then UW is our main competitor for the PAC-12's spot, and them having an early-season loss makes it likelier that we'll win the north over them, even if they beat us. All it takes is them losing some other game and there are plenty of plausible options. In general, I root for outcomes that clear our way to winning the Pac-12, so south teams beating north teams is helpful. We can't control the playoff stuff.

I think the SOS stuff is all a bunch of hoodoo, no one knows how it'll shake out and we play Utah too anyway. As I said, the biggest factor with getting into the playoff is "winning your conference" and "having at most one loss". UW accumulating wins helps neither of those things, their accumulating losses helps with one. SOS is irrelevant (or, rather, would only be relevant in the rare case that are 5+ teams that won their conferences with at most 1 win, which is unlikely).

[stupac2]

It is true that if Washington has a lower winning percentage in the conference than we do, we would win the North championship. So, if Washington lost to Utah and another PAC-12 school, North or South, while we lost only to Washington, we are the North champion. However, in that scenario, we probably aren't getting into the final group of four anyway. I guess we could sneak in if the B1G and/or Big-12 champion also had a loss, but with the anti-PAC12 bias, it is far from a sure thing. I guess I am valuing the "ephemeral" advantage of beating a 1 loss Washington team as the only way we can get into the "final four".

Right, that's what I'm saying. If you think we're playoff caliber (jury's out on that IMO), then UW is our main competitor for the PAC-12's spot, and them having an early-season loss makes it likelier that we'll win the north over them, even if they beat us. All it takes is them losing some other game and there are plenty of plausible options. In general, I root for outcomes that clear our way to winning the Pac-12, so south teams beating north teams is helpful. We can't control the playoff stuff.

I think the SOS stuff is all a bunch of hoodoo, no one knows how it'll shake out and we play Utah too anyway. As I said, the biggest factor with getting into the playoff is "winning your conference" and "having at most one loss". UW accumulating wins helps neither of those things, their accumulating losses helps with one. SOS is irrelevant (or, rather, would only be relevant in the rare case that are 5+ teams that won their conferences with at most 1 win, which is unlikely).

[unclechuck]

Like Venom, I contain multitudes.
[/quote]

Oh Captain! My Captain! our fearful trip is (not yet) done,

[unclechuck]

Like Venom, I contain multitudes.
[/quote]

Oh Captain! My Captain! our fearful trip is (not yet) done,

[BostonCard]

Here's the bottom line:

Cases where a Utah win helps Stanford:
1) UW wins the head-to-head, but has one other conference loss (plus Utah); Stanford's only conference loss is to UW - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
2) Stanford wins the head-to-head, but has two other conference losses; UW's loss to Stanford is its only other conference loss (beyond Utah); no other Pac-12 North team has a record that sends it to the P12 championship - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
3) Neither Stanford nor UW are going to the Pac-12 championship, but otherwise have similar resumes.  A Utah win sends Stanford to a better bowl than UW.

Cases where a UW win helps Stanford:
1) Stanford is a one-loss Pac-12 champion and there are 5 P5 one-loss champions (or an SEC one-loss non-champion).  A win over a highly ranked UW might give Stanford a better resume compared to at least one of the other one-loss champions.
2) Stanford is a two-loss Pac-12 champion and there is at least one other two-loss P5 champion and (and no one loss P5 non-champions).  See above.
3) Stanford is not the Pac-12 champion, but is being considered for a NY6 bowl (and the Pac-12 champion will not be going to the playoff).  Playing a more highly rated UW would give Stanford a better resume compared to other non-champions being considered for a NY6 bowl.
4) Stanford is not going to the Pac-12 championship, but Stanford and Utah have otherwise similar resumes.  A Utah loss sends Stanford to a better bowl than Utah.

It's hard to do all the permutations and hypotheticals, so I default to "which team do I like more".  Go Utes!

BC

[BostonCard]

Here's the bottom line:

Cases where a Utah win helps Stanford:
1) UW wins the head-to-head, but has one other conference loss (plus Utah); Stanford's only conference loss is to UW - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
2) Stanford wins the head-to-head, but has two other conference losses; UW's loss to Stanford is its only other conference loss (beyond Utah); no other Pac-12 North team has a record that sends it to the P12 championship - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
3) Neither Stanford nor UW are going to the Pac-12 championship, but otherwise have similar resumes.  A Utah win sends Stanford to a better bowl than UW.

Cases where a UW win helps Stanford:
1) Stanford is a one-loss Pac-12 champion and there are 5 P5 one-loss champions (or an SEC one-loss non-champion).  A win over a highly ranked UW might give Stanford a better resume compared to at least one of the other one-loss champions.
2) Stanford is a two-loss Pac-12 champion and there is at least one other two-loss P5 champion and (and no one loss P5 non-champions).  See above.
3) Stanford is not the Pac-12 champion, but is being considered for a NY6 bowl (and the Pac-12 champion will not be going to the playoff).  Playing a more highly rated UW would give Stanford a better resume compared to other non-champions being considered for a NY6 bowl.
4) Stanford is not going to the Pac-12 championship, but Stanford and Utah have otherwise similar resumes.  A Utah loss sends Stanford to a better bowl than Utah.

It's hard to do all the permutations and hypotheticals, so I default to "which team do I like more".  Go Utes!

BC

[CardinalSagehen]

Here's the bottom line:

Cases where a Utah win helps Stanford:
1) UW wins the head-to-head, but has one other conference loss (plus Utah); Stanford's only conference loss is to UW - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
2) Stanford wins the head-to-head, but has two other conference losses; UW's loss to Stanford is its only other conference loss (beyond Utah); no other Pac-12 North team has a record that sends it to the P12 championship - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
3) Neither Stanford nor UW are going to the Pac-12 championship, but otherwise have similar resumes.  A Utah win sends Stanford to a better bowl than UW.

Cases where a UW win helps Stanford:
1) Stanford is a one-loss Pac-12 champion and there are 5 P5 one-loss champions (or an SEC one-loss non-champion).  A win over a highly ranked UW might give Stanford a better resume compared to at least one of the other one-loss champions.
2) Stanford is a two-loss Pac-12 champion and there is at least one other two-loss P5 champion and (and no one loss P5 non-champions).  See above.
3) Stanford is not the Pac-12 champion, but is being considered for a NY6 bowl (and the Pac-12 champion will not be going to the playoff).  Playing a more highly rated UW would give Stanford a better resume compared to other non-champions being considered for a NY6 bowl.
4) Stanford is not going to the Pac-12 championship, but Stanford and Utah have otherwise similar resumes.  A Utah loss sends Stanford to a better bowl than Utah.

It's hard to do all the permutations and hypotheticals, so I default to "which team do I like more".  Go Utes!

BC

I agree with the conclusion that it’s very hard to know at this point, so just pick the team you like better.  

But in looking at your list, I’m left leaning toward my original premise - that much better things can happen for us if we first win the North.  The cases for a Utah win seem stronger and more concrete in that regard.  We just saw case #1 in 2015 with respect to Oregon v. Stanford for the North.  

In addition, nearly all of the cases for a UW win are predicated on the assumption that UW will actually prove to be a better team than Utah by the end of the season, which is probable but not yet known.  UW already has a stain on its record vs. the almighty SEC - it doesn’t work out so badly if they don’t turn out to be one of the conference’s top couple teams.  

All of this is just another roundabout way to say, who the heck knows, but Go Utes!

[CardinalSagehen]

Here's the bottom line:

Cases where a Utah win helps Stanford:
1) UW wins the head-to-head, but has one other conference loss (plus Utah); Stanford's only conference loss is to UW - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
2) Stanford wins the head-to-head, but has two other conference losses; UW's loss to Stanford is its only other conference loss (beyond Utah); no other Pac-12 North team has a record that sends it to the P12 championship - Utah win sends Stanford to the Pac-12 championship.
3) Neither Stanford nor UW are going to the Pac-12 championship, but otherwise have similar resumes.  A Utah win sends Stanford to a better bowl than UW.

Cases where a UW win helps Stanford:
1) Stanford is a one-loss Pac-12 champion and there are 5 P5 one-loss champions (or an SEC one-loss non-champion).  A win over a highly ranked UW might give Stanford a better resume compared to at least one of the other one-loss champions.
2) Stanford is a two-loss Pac-12 champion and there is at least one other two-loss P5 champion and (and no one loss P5 non-champions).  See above.
3) Stanford is not the Pac-12 champion, but is being considered for a NY6 bowl (and the Pac-12 champion will not be going to the playoff).  Playing a more highly rated UW would give Stanford a better resume compared to other non-champions being considered for a NY6 bowl.
4) Stanford is not going to the Pac-12 championship, but Stanford and Utah have otherwise similar resumes.  A Utah loss sends Stanford to a better bowl than Utah.

It's hard to do all the permutations and hypotheticals, so I default to "which team do I like more".  Go Utes!

BC

I agree with the conclusion that it’s very hard to know at this point, so just pick the team you like better.  

But in looking at your list, I’m left leaning toward my original premise - that much better things can happen for us if we first win the North.  The cases for a Utah win seem stronger and more concrete in that regard.  We just saw case #1 in 2015 with respect to Oregon v. Stanford for the North.  

In addition, nearly all of the cases for a UW win are predicated on the assumption that UW will actually prove to be a better team than Utah by the end of the season, which is probable but not yet known.  UW already has a stain on its record vs. the almighty SEC - it doesn’t work out so badly if they don’t turn out to be one of the conference’s top couple teams.  

All of this is just another roundabout way to say, who the heck knows, but Go Utes!

[BostonCard]

In addition, nearly all of the cases for a UW win are predicated on the assumption that UW will actually prove to be a better team than Utah by the end of the season, which is probable but not yet known.  UW already has a stain on its record vs. the almighty SEC - it doesn’t work out so badly if they don’t turn out to be one of the conference’s top couple teams.  

I forgot we also play Utah, so in terms of overall strength of schedule (opponent's cumulative record), it makes no difference.  There is a mild reputational bump to playing in a "tougher conference", and a mild reputational bump to beating an elite team (top-10 or better yet top-5).  On the flip side, if beating UW is the difference between Utah being ranked and not, there is something to be said about "playing n+1 ranked teams" verus "playing n ranked teams".

As before... go Utes.

BC

[BostonCard]

In addition, nearly all of the cases for a UW win are predicated on the assumption that UW will actually prove to be a better team than Utah by the end of the season, which is probable but not yet known.  UW already has a stain on its record vs. the almighty SEC - it doesn’t work out so badly if they don’t turn out to be one of the conference’s top couple teams.  

I forgot we also play Utah, so in terms of overall strength of schedule (opponent's cumulative record), it makes no difference.  There is a mild reputational bump to playing in a "tougher conference", and a mild reputational bump to beating an elite team (top-10 or better yet top-5).  On the flip side, if beating UW is the difference between Utah being ranked and not, there is something to be said about "playing n+1 ranked teams" verus "playing n ranked teams".

As before... go Utes.

BC

[Goose]

I certainly agree that it is total conjecture what effect a Utah victory vs. a UW victory may have on Stanford. However, I fear that UW could fall apart with a loss to Utah. It may convince them  that they aren't very good, have two losses, and are going noplace. This has been a typical USC reaction in the past when they get their third loss or so, and they just quit. The UW coach is a good coach, but it depends a lot on the team how it processes adversity. Washington was projected as at worst a one loss team by all the pundits only a few weeks ago. Having that not be true could really hurt their subsequent performance.

That would leave Stanford as the only team in the conference with any kind of national credibility. (I don't yet think ASU is for real.) We would get no breaks based on strength of schedule, etc, even if on paper that isn't quite fair. OTOH, Utah will never get any love from the national media no matter how good they actually are. They are so far under the radar that they could go undefeated and nobody would notice. OK, that is a bit of an overstatement, but only by a bit.

IMHO, the only realistic path Stanford has to the "final four" is to go undefeated in the PAC-12 North. If UW doesn't totally self-destruct, they aren't going to lose two conference games without one of them being Stanford. If we lose more than one game, we aren't getting into the final four anyway, and neither is UW with two losses. For the other "major" bowls, there are just too many imponderables to even guess the "best" Utah-UW outcome. My choice to support UW is based on the hope that if Stanford has one loss, wins the North, and wins the PAC-12 we will be selected to the final four. My fear is the first three happen and the fourth doesn't. If we are undefeated, none of this matters. If we have one loss, beating UW as a highly ranked one loss team may help push the vote in our favor. Beating them as an "also ran" will not so much.

[Goose]

I certainly agree that it is total conjecture what effect a Utah victory vs. a UW victory may have on Stanford. However, I fear that UW could fall apart with a loss to Utah. It may convince them  that they aren't very good, have two losses, and are going noplace. This has been a typical USC reaction in the past when they get their third loss or so, and they just quit. The UW coach is a good coach, but it depends a lot on the team how it processes adversity. Washington was projected as at worst a one loss team by all the pundits only a few weeks ago. Having that not be true could really hurt their subsequent performance.

That would leave Stanford as the only team in the conference with any kind of national credibility. (I don't yet think ASU is for real.) We would get no breaks based on strength of schedule, etc, even if on paper that isn't quite fair. OTOH, Utah will never get any love from the national media no matter how good they actually are. They are so far under the radar that they could go undefeated and nobody would notice. OK, that is a bit of an overstatement, but only by a bit.

IMHO, the only realistic path Stanford has to the "final four" is to go undefeated in the PAC-12 North. If UW doesn't totally self-destruct, they aren't going to lose two conference games without one of them being Stanford. If we lose more than one game, we aren't getting into the final four anyway, and neither is UW with two losses. For the other "major" bowls, there are just too many imponderables to even guess the "best" Utah-UW outcome. My choice to support UW is based on the hope that if Stanford has one loss, wins the North, and wins the PAC-12 we will be selected to the final four. My fear is the first three happen and the fourth doesn't. If we are undefeated, none of this matters. If we have one loss, beating UW as a highly ranked one loss team may help push the vote in our favor. Beating them as an "also ran" will not so much.

[oman]

Well, I'm being entertained so far in the Texas-USC game. 

Not counting it as a win, because Texas can screw up scrambled eggs, but so far so good.

[oman]

Well, I'm being entertained so far in the Texas-USC game. 

Not counting it as a win, because Texas can screw up scrambled eggs, but so far so good.

[washingtonismoney]

SC having its butts beaten is entertaining but not great for the ol' CV. On the other hand, SDSU is giving ASU a fight -- tied 7-7. 

Utah is playing UW tough.

---

Fresno State looks comfortably better than UCLA.

[washingtonismoney]

SC having its butts beaten is entertaining but not great for the ol' CV. On the other hand, SDSU is giving ASU a fight -- tied 7-7. 

Utah is playing UW tough.

---

Fresno State looks comfortably better than UCLA.

[dabigv13]

Playoffs would be nice, but winning P12 and going to Rose Bowl (or is it a playoff venue this year?) more important to me, and also more realistic I think this year.

Therefore I'm definitely rooting for Utah to pull off the upset, though not really seeing it right now...

[dabigv13]

Playoffs would be nice, but winning P12 and going to Rose Bowl (or is it a playoff venue this year?) more important to me, and also more realistic I think this year.

Therefore I'm definitely rooting for Utah to pull off the upset, though not really seeing it right now...

[d4cohn]

Utah has made so many mistakes in this game. The fans are frustrated with Whittingham, because several times, it has appeared that it is finally their turn to win the Pac-12 South (only team that hasn't won the division), only to implode rather spectacularly in big games. 

Pac-12 South is wide open, and after a second consecutive blowout loss for SC, I would probably say Colorado is the favorite.

---

Arizona is tied with FCS Southern Utah at home 17-17, toward end of 1st half. Arizona at UCLA is going to be a futility bowl at this rate.

[d4cohn]

Utah has made so many mistakes in this game. The fans are frustrated with Whittingham, because several times, it has appeared that it is finally their turn to win the Pac-12 South (only team that hasn't won the division), only to implode rather spectacularly in big games. 

Pac-12 South is wide open, and after a second consecutive blowout loss for SC, I would probably say Colorado is the favorite.

---

Arizona is tied with FCS Southern Utah at home 17-17, toward end of 1st half. Arizona at UCLA is going to be a futility bowl at this rate.

[JPR36]

SC having its butts beaten is entertaining but not great for the ol' CV. On the other hand, SDSU is giving ASU a fight -- tied 7-7. 

Utah is playing UW tough.

---

Fresno State looks comfortably better than UCLA.

Yeah, U$C getting their butts kicked never bothers me, but it certainly makes our win over them look less impressive.
Looks like Washington is going to beat Utah. We may have to beat them in Seattle to get to the CC, which will definitely not be an easy task.
Chip Kelly or no Chip Kelly, UCLA without Rosen has gone from mediocre to a disaster.

[JPR36]

SC having its butts beaten is entertaining but not great for the ol' CV. On the other hand, SDSU is giving ASU a fight -- tied 7-7. 

Utah is playing UW tough.

---

Fresno State looks comfortably better than UCLA.

Yeah, U$C getting their butts kicked never bothers me, but it certainly makes our win over them look less impressive.
Looks like Washington is going to beat Utah. We may have to beat them in Seattle to get to the CC, which will definitely not be an easy task.
Chip Kelly or no Chip Kelly, UCLA without Rosen has gone from mediocre to a disaster.

[d4cohn]

If fans are upset with any mistakes we may have made today, they should watch this UW-Utah game. A mind numbing number of mistakes for Utah. Where to begin: pick, fumble, fumble in successive drives, targeting to negate an interception of Browning in the Utah red zone, DL fumbles a sure pick-six of Browning out of bounds, TE drops sure touchdown on 4th and 1 at Washington 2.

[d4cohn]

If fans are upset with any mistakes we may have made today, they should watch this UW-Utah game. A mind numbing number of mistakes for Utah. Where to begin: pick, fumble, fumble in successive drives, targeting to negate an interception of Browning in the Utah red zone, DL fumbles a sure pick-six of Browning out of bounds, TE drops sure touchdown on 4th and 1 at Washington 2.

[Nan3cy]

While we’re talking about teams s*%^ting the bed, how about Wisconsin, 22-point (IIRC) favorites, losing at home to BYU?

[Nan3cy]

While we’re talking about teams s*%^ting the bed, how about Wisconsin, 22-point (IIRC) favorites, losing at home to BYU?

[JPR36]

While we’re talking about teams s*%^ting the bed, how about Wisconsin, 22-point (IIRC) favorites, losing at home to BYU?

Yeah, makes Kal's win over BYU look all the more impressive.
The Bares are 3-0 now, and they haven't done it against cupcakes.
Of course, they were that way last year, too, and faltered one they got to Pac-12 play.
(Oops, maybe they have other than BYU. I didn't think UNC was one until I checked their record. They lost 41-19 to East Carolina.)

[JPR36]

While we’re talking about teams s*%^ting the bed, how about Wisconsin, 22-point (IIRC) favorites, losing at home to BYU?

Yeah, makes Kal's win over BYU look all the more impressive.
The Bares are 3-0 now, and they haven't done it against cupcakes.
Of course, they were that way last year, too, and faltered one they got to Pac-12 play.
(Oops, maybe they have other than BYU. I didn't think UNC was one until I checked their record. They lost 41-19 to East Carolina.)

[CowboyIndian]

The Bares are 3-0 now, and they haven't done it against cupcakes.

BYU looks like a nice win but UNC and...ahem...Idaho State, not so much.

[CowboyIndian]

The Bares are 3-0 now, and they haven't done it against cupcakes.

BYU looks like a nice win but UNC and...ahem...Idaho State, not so much.

[CompSci87]

The Bares are 3-0 now, and they haven't done it against cupcakes.

BYU looks like a nice win but UNC and...ahem...Idaho State, not so much.

A cupcake made with potato flour?

[CompSci87]

The Bares are 3-0 now, and they haven't done it against cupcakes.

BYU looks like a nice win but UNC and...ahem...Idaho State, not so much.

A cupcake made with potato flour?