All PAC-12

[azgreg]

According to a post above it's coaches.

So it's actually some media director for the AD voting like in the coach's poll?


RichRod doesn't have time for that bullshit.

More than likely.

[Scummy Dick Douglas]

Today I learned that this is SUCH a disparity between ASU and UofA's OOC schedules:

Using Sagarin:

36 Notre Dame
171 New Mexico
188 Weber State
-----------------
Average Rank: 132


66 Nevada
132 UTSA
157 UNLV
---------------
Average Rank 118


SDD just keeping it real again.

The disparity is UCLA to ASU/UA. Just keeping it real.

That's not the way you wrote your post. Sorry for reading what you wrote. "UCLA>ASU>UA" right after "such a disparity".

And I stand by that. There is a very big disparity between UCLA's non conf schedule and ASU's and UA's, and when taking into consideration complete schedules, UCLA>ASU>UA. I know you dont like to hear anything but the drinking of cool aid on this site, but my view is not secluded to me alone. Since Sagarin was referenced before, lets reference it again. Strength of schedule according to Sagarin? UCLA #8, ASU #33, UA #35.

This should not be a new or offensive thought to you. It took 2 seconds looking at the Pac 12 blog on ESPN to find todays playoff tracker which states "Arizona’s soft nonconference schedule -- UNLV, UTSA and Nevada -- doesn’t do it any favors either."

[UAEebs86]

Today I learned that this is SUCH a disparity between ASU and UofA's OOC schedules:

Using Sagarin:

36 Notre Dame
171 New Mexico
188 Weber State
-----------------
Average Rank: 132


66 Nevada
132 UTSA
157 UNLV
---------------
Average Rank 118


SDD just keeping it real again.

The disparity is UCLA to ASU/UA. Just keeping it real.

That's not the way you wrote your post. Sorry for reading what you wrote. "UCLA>ASU>UA" right after "such a disparity".

And I stand by that. There is a very big disparity between UCLA's non conf schedule and ASU's and UA's, and when taking into consideration complete schedules, UCLA>ASU>UA. I know you dont like to hear anything but the drinking of cool aid on this site, but my view is not secluded to me alone. Since Sagarin was referenced before, lets reference it again. Strength of schedule according to Sagarin? UCLA #8, ASU #33, UA #35.

This should not be a new or offensive thought to you. It took 2 seconds looking at the Pac 12 blog on ESPN to find todays playoff tracker which states "Arizona’s soft nonconference schedule -- UNLV, UTSA and Nevada -- doesn’t do it any favors either."

I didn't say jack shit about UCLA's OOC schedule. It's obviously much better than ASU and Arizona's.

I didn't say Arizona's OOC schedule wasn't hurting it in the playoff discussion, but nice use of the word "cool aid" - it appears to be
your favorite word when you post here. Either that or "homer".

#33 vs. #35? You've really got me there. Disparity - you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it
means.

I don't see any significant difference between ASU and UofA's OOC schedule other than they played a completely overrated
Notre Dame team and their two dogs were worse than UofA's two dogs.

I bet Nevada would have played ASU and U$C a hell of a lot tougher than Notre Dame did.

[qwertyus]

Apparently Jake Fisher has the strength of 10 men since he can make 1st team playing half a season and his absence was also the whole reason Arizona was able to beat them. We're screwed on Friday with that juggernaut in the lineup.

Perkins not even making 2nd team is the biggest fail - D.J. Foster is a nice player but doesn't belong in front of Perkins at all. (Or Nick Wilson, but I'm biased.....)

Too much love for a Stanford OL that for most of the year couldn't open a hole that Barry Sanders Sr. could run through.

At this point, I am happy with the Arizona snubs though....more fuel for the fire.....

DJ Foster
147 vs Weber st
216 vs New Mex
147 vs CU

And
30 vs ucla
13 vs SC
59 vs Stan
36 vs UW
53 vs Utah
51 vs OSU
34 vs Ariz

Interesting how you pick and choose what stats to use. You fail to include Foster's 21 carries for 120 yds against Notre Dame, and his 15 carries for 96 yard and 3 td's against WSU. I personally dont think Foster should be 2nd team, but tell the whole story if you are going to use stats as support.

IMO Foster is a better slot receiver than he is a RB. Lets look at the regular season output of Paul Perkins, Nick Wilson, and DJ Foster:

Paul Perkins: 1583 total yards 9 TD's
Nick Wilson: 1355 total yards 16 TD's
DJ Foster: 1648 total yards 13 TD's

As you correctly noted, DJ Foster had quite a few of his rushing yards against bad teams (Weber St, New Mexico, and CU). I believe strength of schedule HAS to be taken into account, and when it is, I believe it is no contest, UCLA > ASU > UA, meaning the spot should have gone to Paul Perkins. Since there is such a disparity in OOC schedule, lets compare the players output in Pac 12 play:

Paul Perkins: 1199 total yards 7 TD's
Nick Wilson: 885 total yards 12 TD's
DJ Foster: 1075 total yards 9 TD's

So total output in conference play: Paul Perkins > DJ Foster > Nick Wilson

When looking at only rushing output, and given Nick Wilson injury situation this season, I would say of the 3 as strictly running backs: Paul Perkins > Nick Wilson > DJ Foster.

Also, I really believe the more accurate way of determining output would be to look at YPC against conference opponents. I just dont have time to crunch those numbers right now.

Then put Foster down as a receiver, because his rushing totals are terrible.
Nick Wilson split carries with TJG, and wasn't even a starting RB in all of his games while battling injuries, including a missed game vs USC. And before you blather about how Foster split carries with Richard, Richard took 77/260 carries between the two (29 percent), compared to TJG/Baker taking 130/334 carries (39 percent).

Against cupcakes, Foster racked up yardage on lots of carries. Which is fine, because Wilson racked up carries too (although the worst team on that schedule, UNLV, he only got 7 touches because he wasn't our starting RB). Too bad when comparing Conference rush yards, NW gets 814 to Foster's 519. And the TD disparity on the ground is even worse, 11 to 5.

If you want to put Foster down as a slot guy (because he lines up an plays receiver, this isn't the regular HB screen or swing passes that you'd expect a RB to have), or some sort of jack-of-all-trades offensive player, go ahead. As far as RB's go, NW is pretty clearly better IMO.

BTW, it's not very difficult math either. Mostly addition with a little division. But I guess that kind of "number crunching" is too difficult for you?

[Scummy Dick Douglas]

Today I learned that this is SUCH a disparity between ASU and UofA's OOC schedules:

Using Sagarin:

36 Notre Dame
171 New Mexico
188 Weber State
-----------------
Average Rank: 132


66 Nevada
132 UTSA
157 UNLV
---------------
Average Rank 118


SDD just keeping it real again.

The disparity is UCLA to ASU/UA. Just keeping it real.

That's not the way you wrote your post. Sorry for reading what you wrote. "UCLA>ASU>UA" right after "such a disparity".

And I stand by that. There is a very big disparity between UCLA's non conf schedule and ASU's and UA's, and when taking into consideration complete schedules, UCLA>ASU>UA. I know you dont like to hear anything but the drinking of cool aid on this site, but my view is not secluded to me alone. Since Sagarin was referenced before, lets reference it again. Strength of schedule according to Sagarin? UCLA #8, ASU #33, UA #35.

This should not be a new or offensive thought to you. It took 2 seconds looking at the Pac 12 blog on ESPN to find todays playoff tracker which states "Arizona’s soft nonconference schedule -- UNLV, UTSA and Nevada -- doesn’t do it any favors either."

I didn't say jack shit about UCLA's OOC schedule. It's obviously much better than ASU and Arizona's.

I didn't say Arizona's OOC schedule wasn't hurting it in the playoff discussion, but nice use of the word "cool aid" - it appears to be
your favorite word when you post here. Either that or "homer".

#33 vs. #35? You've really got me there. Disparity - you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it
means.

I don't see any significant difference between ASU and UofA's OOC schedule other than they played a completely overrated
Notre Dame team and their two dogs were worse than UofA's two dogs.

I bet Nevada would have played ASU and U$C a hell of a lot tougher than Notre Dame did.

Its apparent you are not used to being on the winning sides of things, you are very sensitive. Disparity: a great difference. I would say there is a great difference between UCLA's OOC and ASU/UA. Though I might not have been specific enough for you, (my deepest apologies), I will state for the second time the disparity in strength of schedule is between UCLA and the AZ schools, not between the AZ schools.

And as far as Notre Dame goes, my comments here BEFORE ASU played them was that Notre Dame was not that good, and noted that prior to the ASU game they had exactly 2 wins against opponents with winning records, Rice and Stanford.

[Scummy Dick Douglas]

Apparently Jake Fisher has the strength of 10 men since he can make 1st team playing half a season and his absence was also the whole reason Arizona was able to beat them. We're screwed on Friday with that juggernaut in the lineup.

Perkins not even making 2nd team is the biggest fail - D.J. Foster is a nice player but doesn't belong in front of Perkins at all. (Or Nick Wilson, but I'm biased.....)

Too much love for a Stanford OL that for most of the year couldn't open a hole that Barry Sanders Sr. could run through.

At this point, I am happy with the Arizona snubs though....more fuel for the fire.....

DJ Foster
147 vs Weber st
216 vs New Mex
147 vs CU

And
30 vs ucla
13 vs SC
59 vs Stan
36 vs UW
53 vs Utah
51 vs OSU
34 vs Ariz

Interesting how you pick and choose what stats to use. You fail to include Foster's 21 carries for 120 yds against Notre Dame, and his 15 carries for 96 yard and 3 td's against WSU. I personally dont think Foster should be 2nd team, but tell the whole story if you are going to use stats as support.

IMO Foster is a better slot receiver than he is a RB. Lets look at the regular season output of Paul Perkins, Nick Wilson, and DJ Foster:

Paul Perkins: 1583 total yards 9 TD's
Nick Wilson: 1355 total yards 16 TD's
DJ Foster: 1648 total yards 13 TD's

As you correctly noted, DJ Foster had quite a few of his rushing yards against bad teams (Weber St, New Mexico, and CU). I believe strength of schedule HAS to be taken into account, and when it is, I believe it is no contest, UCLA > ASU > UA, meaning the spot should have gone to Paul Perkins. Since there is such a disparity in OOC schedule, lets compare the players output in Pac 12 play:

Paul Perkins: 1199 total yards 7 TD's
Nick Wilson: 885 total yards 12 TD's
DJ Foster: 1075 total yards 9 TD's

So total output in conference play: Paul Perkins > DJ Foster > Nick Wilson

When looking at only rushing output, and given Nick Wilson injury situation this season, I would say of the 3 as strictly running backs: Paul Perkins > Nick Wilson > DJ Foster.

Also, I really believe the more accurate way of determining output would be to look at YPC against conference opponents. I just dont have time to crunch those numbers right now.

Then put Foster down as a receiver, because his rushing totals are terrible.
Nick Wilson split carries with TJG, and wasn't even a starting RB in all of his games while battling injuries, including a missed game vs USC. And before you blather about how Foster split carries with Richard, Richard took 77/260 carries between the two (29 percent), compared to TJG/Baker taking 130/334 carries (39 percent).

Against cupcakes, Foster racked up yardage on lots of carries. Which is fine, because Wilson racked up carries too (although the worst team on that schedule, UNLV, he only got 7 touches because he wasn't our starting RB). Too bad when comparing Conference rush yards, NW gets 814 to Foster's 519. And the TD disparity on the ground is even worse, 11 to 5.

If you want to put Foster down as a slot guy (because he lines up an plays receiver, this isn't the regular HB screen or swing passes that you'd expect a RB to have), or some sort of jack-of-all-trades offensive player, go ahead. As far as RB's go, NW is pretty clearly better IMO.

BTW, it's not very difficult math either. Mostly addition with a little division. But I guess that kind of "number crunching" is too difficult for you?

The number crunching isn't hard. That said, from my phone it gets a bit tedious to try and break out the stats by conference game. And i agree with you, and even said as much in my original post, "I would say of the 3 as strictly running backs: Paul Perkins > Nick Wilson > DJ Foster." Clearly doesn't matter, as much more informed/intelligent opinions than ours have made their decision, and they chose DJ Foster.

[qwertyus]

Apparently Jake Fisher has the strength of 10 men since he can make 1st team playing half a season and his absence was also the whole reason Arizona was able to beat them. We're screwed on Friday with that juggernaut in the lineup.

Perkins not even making 2nd team is the biggest fail - D.J. Foster is a nice player but doesn't belong in front of Perkins at all. (Or Nick Wilson, but I'm biased.....)

Too much love for a Stanford OL that for most of the year couldn't open a hole that Barry Sanders Sr. could run through.

At this point, I am happy with the Arizona snubs though....more fuel for the fire.....

DJ Foster
147 vs Weber st
216 vs New Mex
147 vs CU

And
30 vs ucla
13 vs SC
59 vs Stan
36 vs UW
53 vs Utah
51 vs OSU
34 vs Ariz

Interesting how you pick and choose what stats to use. You fail to include Foster's 21 carries for 120 yds against Notre Dame, and his 15 carries for 96 yard and 3 td's against WSU. I personally dont think Foster should be 2nd team, but tell the whole story if you are going to use stats as support.

IMO Foster is a better slot receiver than he is a RB. Lets look at the regular season output of Paul Perkins, Nick Wilson, and DJ Foster:

Paul Perkins: 1583 total yards 9 TD's
Nick Wilson: 1355 total yards 16 TD's
DJ Foster: 1648 total yards 13 TD's

As you correctly noted, DJ Foster had quite a few of his rushing yards against bad teams (Weber St, New Mexico, and CU). I believe strength of schedule HAS to be taken into account, and when it is, I believe it is no contest, UCLA > ASU > UA, meaning the spot should have gone to Paul Perkins. Since there is such a disparity in OOC schedule, lets compare the players output in Pac 12 play:

Paul Perkins: 1199 total yards 7 TD's
Nick Wilson: 885 total yards 12 TD's
DJ Foster: 1075 total yards 9 TD's

So total output in conference play: Paul Perkins > DJ Foster > Nick Wilson

When looking at only rushing output, and given Nick Wilson injury situation this season, I would say of the 3 as strictly running backs: Paul Perkins > Nick Wilson > DJ Foster.

Also, I really believe the more accurate way of determining output would be to look at YPC against conference opponents. I just dont have time to crunch those numbers right now.

Then put Foster down as a receiver, because his rushing totals are terrible.
Nick Wilson split carries with TJG, and wasn't even a starting RB in all of his games while battling injuries, including a missed game vs USC. And before you blather about how Foster split carries with Richard, Richard took 77/260 carries between the two (29 percent), compared to TJG/Baker taking 130/334 carries (39 percent).

Against cupcakes, Foster racked up yardage on lots of carries. Which is fine, because Wilson racked up carries too (although the worst team on that schedule, UNLV, he only got 7 touches because he wasn't our starting RB). Too bad when comparing Conference rush yards, NW gets 814 to Foster's 519. And the TD disparity on the ground is even worse, 11 to 5.

If you want to put Foster down as a slot guy (because he lines up an plays receiver, this isn't the regular HB screen or swing passes that you'd expect a RB to have), or some sort of jack-of-all-trades offensive player, go ahead. As far as RB's go, NW is pretty clearly better IMO.

BTW, it's not very difficult math either. Mostly addition with a little division. But I guess that kind of "number crunching" is too difficult for you?

The number crunching isn't hard. That said, from my phone it gets a bit tedious to try and break out the stats by conference game. And i agree with you, and even said as much in my original post, "I would say of the 3 as strictly running backs: Paul Perkins > Nick Wilson > DJ Foster." Clearly doesn't matter, as much more informed/intelligent opinions than ours have made their decision, and they chose DJ Foster.

I don't think they made a very informed or intelligent decision. They chose the wrong back, and it's obvious to me. I broke down the stats from the conference games, it's pretty clear.

[Scummy Dick Douglas]

Looking at Foster and Wilson common opponents (Utah, UW, UCLA, CU, WSU), DJ Foster averaged 5.4 ypc rushing the ball (67 att. for 362 yds), while Nick Wilson averaged 5.68 ypc rushing the ball(90 att. for 511 yds). Based on that alone, slight advantage Nick Wilson. But, given the pass happy dynamic that encompasses football at all levels today, I am sure the coaches had no problem taking into account receiving yards for the RB position. (Even at the pro level it is increasingly difficult for RB's to see much playing time if they can't pass protect and catch the ball out of the backfield).

So when looking at those same common opponents while taking into account all output for DJ Foster and Nick Wilson, we have the following: DJ Foster averaged 6.9 yds per rush/reception (67 rushes + 24 catches for 628 total yards) and Nick Wilson averaged 5.7 yds per rush/reception (90 rushes + 4 catches for 536 total yards). I can see how the coaches decided Foster was 2nd team all Pac over Wilson given he averaged more than a yard more than Wilson every time he possessed the ball in games played against common opponents.

At the end of the day, if you asked me who the better pure rusher was, I would not hesitate to say it is Nick Wilson. (Hell, Foster isnt even the best pure rusher on his team. I think that 17 year old kid they have that averaged 5.8 yards rushing is a much better pure rusher). But when asked which of the two is a bigger offensive threat, I would say DJ Foster based on his ability to hurt you from anywhere on the field. So the real question is, how do the Pac 12 coaches see the RB position? Do they judge a RB strictly by his ability when handed the ball behind the line of scrimmage? Or do they take into account receiving and blocking when grading a RB?

I guess at the end of the day, none of this shit matters. I would personally take Buck Allen and Royce Freeman (also both very good catching the ball out of the backfield)over any RB's in the PAC.

[Chicat]

You're giving whoever made these votes for the coaches way too much credit if you think they looked at yards per touch vs. common opponents.

[qwertyus]

Looking at Foster and Wilson common opponents (Utah, UW, UCLA, CU, WSU), DJ Foster averaged 5.4 ypc rushing the ball (67 att. for 362 yds), while Nick Wilson averaged 5.68 ypc rushing the ball(90 att. for 511 yds). Based on that alone, slight advantage Nick Wilson. But, given the pass happy dynamic that encompasses football at all levels today, I am sure the coaches had no problem taking into account receiving yards for the RB position. (Even at the pro level it is increasingly difficult for RB's to see much playing time if they can't pass protect and catch the ball out of the backfield).

So when looking at those same common opponents while taking into account all output for DJ Foster and Nick Wilson, we have the following: DJ Foster averaged 6.9 yds per rush/reception (67 rushes + 24 catches for 628 total yards) and Nick Wilson averaged 5.7 yds per rush/reception (90 rushes + 4 catches for 536 total yards). I can see how the coaches decided Foster was 2nd team all Pac over Wilson given he averaged more than a yard more than Wilson every time he possessed the ball in games played against common opponents.

At the end of the day, if you asked me who the better pure rusher was, I would not hesitate to say it is Nick Wilson. (Hell, Foster isnt even the best pure rusher on his team. I think that 17 year old kid they have that averaged 5.8 yards rushing is a much better pure rusher). But when asked which of the two is a bigger offensive threat, I would say DJ Foster based on his ability to hurt you from anywhere on the field. So the real question is, how do the Pac 12 coaches see the RB position? Do they judge a RB strictly by his ability when handed the ball behind the line of scrimmage? Or do they take into account receiving and blocking when grading a RB?

I guess at the end of the day, none of this shit matters. I would personally take Buck Allen and Royce Freeman (also both very good catching the ball out of the backfield)over any RB's in the PAC.

Now all that matters is YPC? Why fixate on that? And there are only 5 common opponents, why only use those games to determine how good they are? How about the 2-1 rushing TD difference? How about the fact that NW had 6 games of 20 or more rushes, and Foster had 3? Surely if they were so close in terms of ability Foster would be used more?

Whatever. I'd probably take Buck Allen too, but I'll give NW another 2 years before I decide for sure. Wilson's still a true Freshman.

[MrBug708]

This award list is an even bigger sham. Butkus winner is second team all league

[ASUHATER!]

This award list is an even bigger sham. Butkus winner is second team all league

You mean the person who shouldn't have won the butkus?