(CLICK HERE, if you are unable to view this photo gallery on your mobile device.)
Subscribe to the free Hotline newsletter, which brings all the latest Pac-12 news — on the field and off — to your inbox three times per week throughout the college sports season and twice a week in the summer. Click here.
The Pac-12 seems to have an Oregon problem.
More specifically, the Pac-12 head coaches seem to have a problem with Oregon.
We reached that conclusion after examining the all-conference voting results Tuesday that were, shall we say, interesting.
We’re talking about the conference champions … the team that won nine of 10 games against Pac-12 opponents … that had Auburn beat for 59 minutes … that poleaxed USC in the Coliseum … that finished sixth in the playoff rankings … that smoked Utah in the championship … that’s headed to the Rose Bowl.
That team had just four all-conference offensive and defensive players — FOUR! — in a vote of the head coaches taken in the 48 hours after the championship.
They watched the Ducks win the North.
They watched the Ducks win the conference.
And then they voted … and only four spots out of the 46 available on offense and defense went to the Ducks.
* First team: left tackle Penei Sewell
* Second team: tailback CJ Verdell, guard Shane Lemieux and linebacker Troy Dye
That’s right, a defensive unit that ranks No. 24 nationally in third-down conversion percentage allowed …
And No. 16 nationally in yards-per-play allowed …
And No. 9 nationally in points-per-game allowed …
And No. 1 nationally in red-zone touchdowns allowed …
That unit had one player named first- or second-team all-conference.
And Oregon’s offense, which ranked No. 15 nationally and second in the conference in points per game, had three selections.
Arizona State, which finished ninth in the conference in scoring, also had three selections.
That all strikes the Hotline as curious.
So does this:
* Washington, which finished four games behind the Ducks in the North, had more first-team selections (five) than the Ducks had total selections (four).
(Again, we’re talking offense and defense, not special teams.)
* USC, which lost twice as many games as the Ducks and scored 32 fewer points that night in the Coliseum, had two more all-conference players than Oregon.
* Utah, which didn’t beat USC and didn’t beat Oregon and didn’t win the conference championship, had two-and-a-half times the number of all-conference selections as the Ducks.
Utah: 10
Oregon: 4
Does that strike anyone else as odd?
Because it struck the Hotline as odd.
Not odd like a quirky coincidence.
Odd like something’s up.
Like the coaches purposely didn’t vote for Oregon players for the all-conference teams or for Mario Cristobal as Coach of the Year.
That honor went to the coach Cristobal beat by 22 points in the championship game (Utah’s Kyle Whittingham).
And so for context on all this, ahem, quirkiness, we did what we always do here at the Hotline:
We hit the books.
Turns out, Oregon’s all-conference treatment as a Pac-12 champion is unprecedented.
We went through all nine seasons of the 12-school era and tallied the number of first- and second-team selections for each champion (once again: offense and defense only).
It makes perfect sense that recognition would track the success, right? Without top-tier players, it’s difficult to win with the consistency required for a title.
And what evidence did the Hotline’s crack research team uncover?
Welp, the Ducks had fewer first- and second-team selections than any other champion over the nine years.
And it’s not close.
In fact, it’s suspiciously not close.
Presenting the first piece of evidence in our conspiracy theory: year, champion and total first/second-team selections (listed in order of selections):
2016 Washington: 12 (first/second-team honorees)
2012 Stanford: 10
2013 Stanford: 10
2014 Oregon: 9
2017 USC: 9
2015 Stanford: 8
2018 Washington: 8
2011 Oregon: 6
2019 Oregon: 4
Oh, but there’s more …
Number of first-team selections:
2016 Washington: 9
2015 Stanford: 6
2017 USC: 6
2018 Washington: 6
2012 Stanford: 5
2013 Stanford: 5
2014 Oregon: 5
2011 Oregon: 4
2019 Oregon: 1
What should we make of the situation?
First of all, it has nothing to do with the conference office. The conference distributes the ballots and tabulates the results but has no input. Let’s leave Larry Scott and Woodie Dixon out of it.
This is entirely about Cristobal’s peers.
(The head coaches, by the way, aren’t allowed to vote for their own players.)
— Maybe it’s merely a coincidence, a head-scratching, history-making, utterly baffling but totally innocent one-off.
— Maybe the Pac-12 coaches believed … truly believed … that Oregon lacked a significant amount of high-level talent.
But if so, then shouldn’t Cristobal have been named Coach of the Year?
Because it has to be one or the other:
To win nine out of 10 against conference opponents and dominate the championship, you either possess a load of talent relative to everyone else or you’ve produced some damn fine coaching.
Based on the voting — did we mention that Washington had eight players on the first/second teams, and the Ducks had four? — it appears the Pac-12 coaches didn’t think Oregon had the best roster, or even close.
And yet they didn’t vote Cristobal COY.
Instead, they gave it to a coach who had the best roster (10 all-conference selections) and lost the head-to-head to Cristobal by 22 points.
It has to be one or the other, except with Oregon it’s neither and with Utah it’s both.
Hmmmmm.
— Or maybe it’s personal.
Maybe coaches around the conference just don’t like Cristobal, for whatever reason.
We know he’s intense.
We know he’s tough.
And we know he’s an ultra-aggressive recruiter whose SEC-style and resounding success have brought disruption to the orderly world of Pac-12 recruiting and — just a guess on our part — made him precious few friends around the conference.
Maybe not voting for more Ducks and not voting for Cristobal was an attempt to undermine his efforts on the recruiting trail.
Again, we’re speculating on the reason, but not the motivation.
Based on historical voting patterns (facts) and what we witnessed on the field (scoreboard), the Hotline can draw only one conclusion from the way Cristobal and his players were treated:
It was personal.
Support the Hotline: Several Hotline articles will remain free each month (as will the newsletter), but for access to all content, you’ll need to subscribe. I’ve secured a rate of $1 per week for a full year or — introductory offer alert! — just 99 cents for the first month, with the option to cancel anytime. Click here. And thanks for your loyalty.
*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to pac12hotline@bayareanewsgroup.com or call 408-920-5716
*** Follow me on Twitter: @WilnerHotline
*** Pac-12 Hotline is not endorsed or sponsored by the Pac-12 Conference, and the views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the Conference.
