Welcome to the mailbag.
To the notes!
Marcus from Canaan, Conn., writes: It's been said many times that Mark Helfrich was given the keys to a Ferrari. Well, he took that Ferrari and smashed it into a telephone pole. That said, shouldn't the Ducks brass find someone else to drive said Ferrari?
Ted Miller: The problem is we can't judge whether or not the wreck was driver error. Maybe the brakes failed. Or perhaps the Ferrari sprained its knee. It's possible Oregon would be 9-2 at present even if Chip Kelly were still the coach. Or 9-2 under a resurrected Vince Lombardi.
Recall that Kelly's first year was hardly perfect after he took over a 10-3 team from Mike Bellotti that welcomed back a lot of good players, including QB Jeremiah Masoli. Folks, in fact, immediately questioned Kelly's leadership during the disaster at Boise State to open the season.
Then, after winning seven in a row and rising to No. 8, the Ducks got bombed at unranked Stanford. Finally, Kelly's first team lost the Rose Bowl 26-17 to an Ohio State team it should have beaten by two touchdowns, making mercurial Terrelle Pryor look like an All-American.
The point is a single season is too small a sample size to pass judgment on a head coach -- good or bad.
Coaching a college team is not easy, and folks trying to completely write off the transition between Kelly and Helfrich were being short-sighted. It certainly was a major reason your Pac-12 bloggers picked Stanford to win the Pac-12 in the preseason.
Helfrich might be a great coach. He might even end up better than Kelly. But there is a transition there, as well as a learning curve for a guy who's never sat in the corner office.
I'm sure some folks questioned Bellotti in 1995, his first season, when the Ducks lost to middling Stanford and Arizona State teams and then got stomped by Colorado in the Cotton Bowl.
While it's completely understandable to be frustrated with where things stand at this moment -- that's how it is, being a fan -- let the more reasonable part of your brain prevail. Have patience and allow a bigger and more nuanced picture to develop before passing judgment on Helfrich.
Jason from St. Louis writes: My Stanford friends and I are split about this week's ASU-Arizona game. Do you think it is better that ASU lose so we get home-field advantage in the Pac-12 championship game, or for ASU to win so ASU is a potential top-10 team rather than top-20 team? I know this only affects postseason rankings and offseason bragging rights (assuming we win), but those are both big. Also, in his chat this week, Kevin thought ASU has a 50 percent chance of winning the championship at home, but only a 35 percent chance of winning if the game is on the Farm. Do you agree with those numbers?
Ted Miller: You 100 percent want Arizona State to lose so you get home-field advantage. There is no percentage of your thinking that should want to go on the road to Tempe, where the Sun Devils are dominant. To quote myself:
The Sun Devils are 6-0 at home this year with an average margin of victory of 26.8 points per game, including wins over two ranked teams, Wisconsin and USC, as well as a blowout victory over Washington. They are 3-2 on the road, with a 42-28 loss at Stanford, a game that was 39-7 entering the fourth quarter.
While it would be more impressive for Stanford to beat a highly ranked Arizona State team playing at home, the victory prize would still be the same: the Rose Bowl. Further, I don't think the Cardinal would get as much of a jump in the national rankings for winning in Tempe simply because they've already beaten ASU this season.
And I think Kevin is absolutely correct. Both of Stanford's losses came on the road this year, and the Cardinal have won 15 consecutive home games, tied for the second-longest active streak in the nation with Ohio State.
Papa John from Santa Barbara, Calif., writes: A few years back, the Pac-12 blog awarded Stanford's FB/LB Owen Marecic the title of STUD in its all-conference team selections. I was wondering if you could take that title out of retirement and award it to Trent Murphy this year, especially given his snubbing by the Butkus, Bednarik, etc. committees?
Ted Miller: That actually was the then-Pac-12 blog, not the official Pac-12 team, which can't afford to be as colorful as us.
First, Murphy is an iron-clad lock to be first-team All-Pac-12, and I'd add that he is the favorite to win conference Defensive Player of the Year honors.
While Murphy has a right to be smarting after getting snubbed for those awards, he also is almost certain to be named a first-team All-American. That's a pretty good consolation prize.
74Coug from Virginia Beach writes: As we approach another Apple Cup, why is it that nobody gives Washington State more credit for last year's victory? All writing is of an epic Washington collapse, when a reasonable perspective is that the Cougars led at halftime, and the record comeback was really necessitated only by giving Washington three short-field TDs off of turnovers.
Ted Miller: That's a fair point. Three turnovers from Washington State led to two Washington touchdowns in the third quarter, and that was the primary reason the Huskies led 28-10 entering the fourth quarter. So the Cougars' collapse in the third after leading at halftime was balanced by the Huskies' collapse in the fourth.
But, really, come on. You couldn't take this position with the game video running.
Start with this: It was the biggest lost fourth-quarter lead in the history of the Apple Cup.
Further, Washington was a two-touchdown favorite. It had won four in a row and was 7-4 overall and 5-3 in conference play, while the 2-9 Cougars had lost eight in a row and were winless in Pac-12 play. The week before, the Cougs had lost 46-7 at Arizona State. Washington was the better team.
That makes the main storyline the Huskies collapse, no matter what.
But then you toss exactly how things went down in the fourth quarter and overtime, which Bud Withers does a good job of recounting here, and you see the Huskies make like Dumb and Dumber.
In the fourth quarter, the Huskies had a fumble, five penalties -- two pass interferences and a roughing-the-passer -- and a missed 35-yard field goal for the victory in regulation. On Washington's first possession of overtime, Huskies QB Keith Price had perhaps his biggest career brain, er, hiccup, on his interception to Toni Pole, who rumbled all the way to the Huskies' 5-yard line to set up the winning field goal.
The Cougars, without question, deserve credit for showing mental toughness and resolve for taking advantage of the Huskies going rear-end-over-tea-kettle. And that was the Washington State storyline this week when chatting with coach Mike Leach, "What did that Apple Cup win mean for you guys heading into the offseason and 2013 season?"
But yielding an 18-point fourth-quarter lead, as Washington did, was nothing less than a collapse, and it was the biggest reason why folks were putting Steve Sarkisian on the hot seat last summer.
Elk from Los Angeles writes: You can't overstate the importance of winning the line of scrimmage this year. Who do you think wins the Morris trophies this year? Interesting that last year's winners will be lining up against each other in the Pac-12 championship game.
I'd also, on the offensive line, throw in UCLA's Xavier Su'a-Filo, but I think Yankey will repeat.
Steve from Union City, Calif., writes: Re: Your and Kevin's Picks this week -- Lame. You guys should have some rule that you can't make all the same picks in any given week. Especially the last week of the regular season, when you are already TIED. And so it will end in a tie. Lame, lame.
Ted Miller: I agree. I felt lame while I was picking all the same teams as Kevin. And that's my fault, as Kevin sends me his picks and I post them on the blog.
The problem with this week was I had already thought about the picks before Kevin sent me his. What he sent me was pretty much what I had worked out in my head. While nearly all the games gave me pause, I just couldn't pull the trigger on a road underdog.
There have been times this year when I just said, "Oh, what the heck!" and picked against my inclination so we'd be different. That pick has tended to be pretty weak.
But don't despair! We have the bowl games ahead, so the tie could be broken.