Fear the Huskies? (or, proof that the Pac-10 is actually pretty awesome)

Last week, immediately after USC wrapped up its epic victory over Ohio State, our resident “Trojan Husky,” David K., responded to my obligatory “Beat the Huskies!” tweet by commenting: “BOW DOWN! BEAT THE TROJANS!” I snarkily responded, “My my, aren’t we getting uppity and optimistic after our first win since 2007, over the sixth-worst team in Division I-A [i.e., Idaho].”

But, as David pointed out, Washington looked good in its loss to LSU. Two games into the Sarkisian Era, the Huskies already appear much improved from the disaster of the Ty years. Jake Locker is back, and he’s the real deal. Washington may be 1-15 in their last 16 games, but they ought not be dismissed out of hand. We don’t know yet what this year’s UW team is capable of — we’ll find out tomorrow. But Stewart Mandel is bullish, predicting a Husky stunner, 27-24 over the Trojans:

It’s a classic letdown game for USC. Husky Stadium will be revved up, Washington quarterback Jake Locker can cause problems for any defense and the Trojans’ offense showed against Ohio State it’s still quite clearly a work in progress — and that was before quarterback Matt Barkley hurt his shoulder.

Sandy Underpants concurs that Washington is a real threat to USC: “It’s the same trap as last year, so I hope Pete won’t fall into it…. again. Big game letdown against a team that supposedly stinks (but actually doesn’t). Plus the fact that Corp may start. I’m actually more worried about this Washington game than I was the Ohio St. game (before tOSU game started that is).”

Sandy’s comment got me thinking. This is indeed the “trap” that has repeatedly tripped up USC: a tough road game against, not a heavily hyped non-conference opponent, but a familiar Pac-10 foe. Just look at the history: since losing at Kansas State in September 2002, early in Pete Carroll’s second year at the helm, the Trojans have only lost to one non-Pac-10 team — and that was #2 Texas, with Vince Young playing at superhuman levels. Meanwhile, since that Kansas State game, the Trojans have lost at Washington State (30-27 in OT in 2002), at Cal (34-31 in OT in 2003), at Oregon State (33-31 in 2006), at UCLA (13-9 in 2006), vs. Stanford (24-23 in 2007), at Oregon (24-17 in 2007), and at Oregon State again (27-21 in 2008).

This should be instructive to those who insist, year after year, that the Pac-10 sucks, that it’s really the “Pac-1” (or “USC and the 9 midgets”), etc. etc. To review: the Trojans have lost to 6 of the 9 other Pac-10 teams — one of them twice — during a span when they’ve beaten: Auburn and Arkansas (twice) from the SEC; Oklahoma, Iowa, and Nebraska (twice) from the Big 12; Michigan (twice), Ohio State (twice), Penn State and Illinois from the Big Ten; Virginia and Virginia Tech from the ACC; BYU (twice); and of course Notre Dame (7 times).

So the Trojans are either 22-1 (.957) or 24-1 (.960) against BCS and BCS-level competition — depending on whether you count BYU, which admittedly wasn’t nearly as good in the early 2000s as it is now — but 52-7 (.881) against the Pac-10. And, of course, it has been a Pac-10 road loss that has prevented USC from reaching the BCS title game in 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09. If the Pac-10 were truly the Pac-1, USC would almost certainly own four BCS championships in this decade, possibly five, instead of just one. (I’m going to go ahead and assume that we would have beaten Oklahoma in ’04 and Ohio State in ’07 and ’08. Dunno about Oklahoma/Florida last year.)

Anyway, there are three Pac-10 teams who haven’t beaten USC since 2002: Arizona, Arizona State… and Washington. Let’s hope the Trojans keep it that way tomorrow. BEAT THE HUSKIES.