It's been discussed here, on ESPN, on blogs, everywhere.
Something is grossly wrong with the state of Pac-10 football. The big question is "why is this happening"?
Lost in all of this Pac-10 hatred, of course, is the fact that other leagues are still doing worse. The ACC has had some terrible losses and has one undefeated team (Wake Forest). The Big East in 2006 had three big teams - WVU, Louisville, and Rutgers, all of which now are struggling. The Big Ten has OSU and Michigan, their two flag wavers, slacking.
But things in the Pac-10 are horrid. Outside of USC and Oregon, no team is carrying the banner properly (I'm willing to excuse Oregon's loss to Boise State because they were down to their fifth-string, no joke, QB). Arizona State had big expectations, but lost to UNLV and got throttled by Georgia. The rest of the teams in the Pac-10 have no realistic aspirations, except ours truly - CFN, for instance, is willing to rank Cal in the top 25 and excuse that loss to Maryland on time zone adjustments and humidity.
There is, however, no question that the Pac-10 needs to step up to avoid being the Pac-1. Most of the Pac-10 teams are done with their non-conference slates, so this means that, in order to gain national respect, the Pac-10 has to be dominated by two or three teams - USC, Oregon, Cal. ASU winning the conference or even placing in the top three would reflect horribly.
The prime reasons in my mind for the Pac-10's poor showing OOC is two-fold: willingness to schedule tough BCS and non-BCS games and the fact that non-BCS leagues are "catching up" with BCS teams. Hell, look at the AP rankings - there are six, count them, six non-BCS teams: one from C-USA, two from the WAC, and and astonishing three from MWC (more than the number of teams from the Big East and Pac-10 - combined!).
The Pac-10 is clearly in rebuilding mode, though. This national perception may linger around all year. Maybe next year.
I'm done rambling - thoughts?