(Written by kencraw)

I wanted this to be a regular feature, but ran out of time the first couple weeks. Let’s see if I can keep it going through the rest of the season.

• USC (13) @ UW (16): This could be a blog post of its own. I saved this game on the Tivo and watched it later in the weekend. Here’s the two sides to this upset:
• Upsides for the Bears:
• This is the most sloppy USC team I’ve ever seen. One thing you could count on USC for throughout the years is that they were perfect in their simplicity. They just hit you hard and did what they did and won even when it was more ugly than it could be. I think this is part of the reason they never looked inexperienced, they just kept things simple. Not this team. They’re fumbling for no good reason, over-pursuing on defense, allowing gaping holes in the secondary, just not very good play. For the first time in recent memory USC looks like an inexperienced team.
• Neither USC line looked all that strong, even the lauded offensive line, but particularly the defensive line. Between Cal’s confusing and attacking 3-4 defense that’ll give the USC offensive line as much if not more than they can handle and Cal’s rushing game having plenty of holes to run through, these USC lines better improve dramatically if they want a shot at beating Cal. They didn’t control the line of scrimmage.
• Unlike previous USC early loses, something about this didn’t feel like an aberration. USC looked shaky against Ohio State and they looked even more shaky versus UW.
• This was not some early lead by UW that they had to hold on to like previous USC upset examples. Nope, UW was down 10 early and the game was tied at 13 mid-4th quarter. UW still came up with the game winning drive.
• Notes of caution:
• Aaron Corp was TERRIBLE! Really, if USC had any balance on offensive, USC doesn’t lose this game. It’s pretty clear now why Barkely was starting. He’ll be healthy by the Cal game in two weeks so we won’t have the benefits that UW did.
• USC had a number of turnovers that killed drives. I’ve got this in the ‘upsides’ half as “sloppy play” and we can definitely take that sign as something that compromises the team, but turnovers are not something to count on. A lot of the time its the luck of the draw. Also, it’s something that can more easily be corrected in practice so USC may not have this problem by the time the Bears get their shot at it.
• USC does this every year, lose their first conference game, and comes out no worse for the wear, national title implications aside. Even the Bears win in 2003 was the 1st conference game for USC. 2008 Oregon State was too. 2006 Oregon State was the first game if you don’t count Washington and Washington State as conference teams. Only Stanford, which really won because of a QB injury wasn’t the formulaic loss (hmmm… 1st conference game, 1st conference road game, injured starting QB… USC didn’t stand a chance, did they?)
• I know this has been all about USC, but don’t forget UW. Going to Seattle in December could be trouble with a revitalized UW to match up against. No matter what happens from here on out that’s going to be a team that knows they’re capable of beating anyone, even if they don’t always pull it off. Let’s hope the Bears have the Rose Bowl locked up before we get to that one.
• Utah (24) @ Oregon (31): Another one I watched Tivo’ed. If Oregon wants to keep winning, they’re going to have to clean up their act substantially. For whatever reason both Purdue and Utah seemed to completely forget that Oregon runs a read-option and that Masoli is a pretty decent run threat in those plays. More than half of their scores came on long Masoli runs where the DE and safety bit on the inside run. Cal is not going to be so stupid. Add in that Masoli still has trouble hitting the broad side of a barn throwing the ball and Oregon put the ball on the ground WAY too many times (they were even more sloppy than USC) and Cal will win this game with ease if Oregon puts up a repeat performance. But don’t count out this Oregon team yet. They’ve still got lots of talent and if they turn the corner mistake wise, they’ll be a much more formidable opponent than they have been.
• Arizona (17) @ Iowa (27): This Arizona team is about what everyone expected. Not quite good enough on offense to be good but having a strong enough defense to keep them in lots of games. Iowa was just a bit to strong for Arizona to handle on the road. Still, I’m thankful Cal gets them at home this year.
• Kansas St. (9) @ UCLA (23): Anybody else getting more scared about UCLA? OK, they’re not USC yet, but we all know how tough UCLA has been in the Rose Bowl. This team is for real and even without their starting QB they’re looking like a formidable yet beatable foe.
• Cincinnati (28) @ Oregon State (18): I really expected a stronger effort out of OSU. Cinci seems to have their number and Oregon State always starts slow, but I think this game is further proof OSU is a step behind where they were last year.
• SMU (27) @ WSU (30) 1-OT: Nice to see WSU get one in the win column before it’s too late. Actually, here’s my prediction for WSU. They’ll win at least one conference game, more likely two, over teams that assume they’ll be as terrible as last year and won’t bring their A-game to the frozen potato patch (the less terrifying version of the frozen tundra) in Pullman.
• SJ State (17) @ Stanford (42): Get ready for an obnoxious Stanford fan base that thinks their remarkably mediocre team is something special. It’s not. SJ State stinks this year and Stanford just doesn’t have the tools yet to compete on the big stage.
• LA Monroe (14) @ ASU (38): Is anyone still awake or are we all snoring now that we’re in the garbage games? Ho Hum.

Overall, the Pac-10 well represented themselves this weekend. The only non-conference loss was to Cincinnati (EDIT: Oops. That’s two loses with Arizona going down to Iowa) who everyone thinks is going to win the Big East again (or so I hear). If OSU could have pulled that one out the Pac-10 would be nearly unimpeachable. As it stands, the few losses are either to good teams (LSU, etc.) or by teams that are at the bottom of the conference.