[ColoradoTree]

According to this link (http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-seminoles ), most folks expect that Pac-12 to miss the playoff.  This isn't new, and it's in line with what many other sportswriters have said, but it seemed pretty lopsided nonetheless.

Of the 36 so-called experts polled, 21 picked Clemson to win it all, 5 picked Alabama, 5 Florida State, 2 LSU, 2 Oklahoma, and 1 Ohio State.  Not one picked a Pac-12 team to win it all.  In fact, not a one picked a Pac-12 team to even make the national championship game (and someone even picked Iowa to make the national title game).  And only 7 of the 36 experts even picked a Pac-12 team to make the playoff--with 4 picking Stanford, 2 picking Washington, and 1 picking UCLA.  So, kudos to Desmond Howard, Rocky Boiman, Todd McShay, and Adam Rittenberg for picking Stanford to make the playoff, at least, but there is a national perception issue that could use some changing. 

In fairness to a lot of those experts, however, they're probably not wrong that the Pac-12 champion (which 22 of the 36 expect to be Stanford) will have 2 or more losses, and thus miss out.  (FWIW, 9 of the experts picked Washington, 4 picked UCLA, and 1 picked SC.)  And I don't think most of those experts see that as a negative commentary on the overall quality of the conference, but a recognition that there isn't a team or two that's obviously head and shoulders above the rest at this point, like there is in the ACC (with Clemson and Florida State) Big Ten (Ohio State, Michigan, and Michigan State), or SEC (Alabama and LSU). 

Other interesting notes from those predictions:

* 6 experts (David Pollack, Mike Bellotti, Anthony Becht, Cole Cubelic, our own Ivan Maisel, and Greg McElroy) picked both Clemson and FSU to make the playoff.  I think that's an awfully tall order, given the overall weakness of the ACC.  Whichever team loses the Clemson-FSU game ain't making it in.  They must be assuming FSU wins over Ole Miss and Florida in non-conference play and Clemson wins over Auburn and South Carolina.  I wouldn't mind seeing Auburn knock off Clemson and Ole Miss beat FSU in Week 1 just to see these experts get some egg on their faces, which would be a turnabout from my usual stance of rooting for SEC teams to lose as much as possible.
* By contrast, just 4 experts (Craig Haubert, Rene Ingoglia, Tom Luginbill, and Jonathan Vilma) picked both Alabama and LSU to make the playoff.  That seems more realistic.  If Alabama runs the table, it's obviously in, and if LSU only has a loss to 'Bama combined with wins over Wisconsin in Lambeau and road games against Florida, Auburn, and A&M, I can see that the committee might put a 1-loss LSU over a 2-loss conference champ.  But Alabama has a relatively tough schedule. It is on the road against #5 LSU, #9 Tennessee (which seems way too high for that team), and #11 Ole Miss. 
* 3 experts have N.D. in the playoff.  Combined with UCLA and U-Dub, that makes 7 predictions of Stanford opponents in the playoff. 

[ColoradoTree]

According to this link (http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-seminoles ), most folks expect that Pac-12 to miss the playoff.  This isn't new, and it's in line with what many other sportswriters have said, but it seemed pretty lopsided nonetheless.

Of the 36 so-called experts polled, 21 picked Clemson to win it all, 5 picked Alabama, 5 Florida State, 2 LSU, 2 Oklahoma, and 1 Ohio State.  Not one picked a Pac-12 team to win it all.  In fact, not a one picked a Pac-12 team to even make the national championship game (and someone even picked Iowa to make the national title game).  And only 7 of the 36 experts even picked a Pac-12 team to make the playoff--with 4 picking Stanford, 2 picking Washington, and 1 picking UCLA.  So, kudos to Desmond Howard, Rocky Boiman, Todd McShay, and Adam Rittenberg for picking Stanford to make the playoff, at least, but there is a national perception issue that could use some changing. 

In fairness to a lot of those experts, however, they're probably not wrong that the Pac-12 champion (which 22 of the 36 expect to be Stanford) will have 2 or more losses, and thus miss out.  (FWIW, 9 of the experts picked Washington, 4 picked UCLA, and 1 picked SC.)  And I don't think most of those experts see that as a negative commentary on the overall quality of the conference, but a recognition that there isn't a team or two that's obviously head and shoulders above the rest at this point, like there is in the ACC (with Clemson and Florida State) Big Ten (Ohio State, Michigan, and Michigan State), or SEC (Alabama and LSU). 

Other interesting notes from those predictions:

* 6 experts (David Pollack, Mike Bellotti, Anthony Becht, Cole Cubelic, our own Ivan Maisel, and Greg McElroy) picked both Clemson and FSU to make the playoff.  I think that's an awfully tall order, given the overall weakness of the ACC.  Whichever team loses the Clemson-FSU game ain't making it in.  They must be assuming FSU wins over Ole Miss and Florida in non-conference play and Clemson wins over Auburn and South Carolina.  I wouldn't mind seeing Auburn knock off Clemson and Ole Miss beat FSU in Week 1 just to see these experts get some egg on their faces, which would be a turnabout from my usual stance of rooting for SEC teams to lose as much as possible.
* By contrast, just 4 experts (Craig Haubert, Rene Ingoglia, Tom Luginbill, and Jonathan Vilma) picked both Alabama and LSU to make the playoff.  That seems more realistic.  If Alabama runs the table, it's obviously in, and if LSU only has a loss to 'Bama combined with wins over Wisconsin in Lambeau and road games against Florida, Auburn, and A&M, I can see that the committee might put a 1-loss LSU over a 2-loss conference champ.  But Alabama has a relatively tough schedule. It is on the road against #5 LSU, #9 Tennessee (which seems way too high for that team), and #11 Ole Miss. 
* 3 experts have N.D. in the playoff.  Combined with UCLA and U-Dub, that makes 7 predictions of Stanford opponents in the playoff.