Pac-10 notebook: Defense seems to buoy WSU's national image

Maybe Washington State will always be that team that gets picked to finish seventh in the Pac-10 when it deserves consideration for the title. Maybe it will always be first in line to say, "We don't get no respect." (And let's face it, that's a long line.)

But the national rankings indicate a possible shift in the way the Cougars are viewed nationally, perhaps as a result of a three-year run of wins that now stands at 28.

This week, the Cougars (8-2) are No. 8 in both the AP and coaches polls. In the AP poll, there are 13 two-loss teams from BCS conferences, and WSU is ahead of nine of them and behind only Michigan (No. 5), Texas (6) and Georgia (7).

If there isn't a revisionist way of looking at the Cougars, how do you figure this? Tennessee (7-2), No. 9, has won on the road at No. 15 Florida and No. 14 Miami — and trails WSU by one spot.

Ever think you'd see the day when Virginia Tech (7-2), Florida State (8-2) and Miami (7-2) would be ranked well behind a WSU team with the same number of losses?

A dispassionate observer — and those tend to be limited in these parts — could look at the Cougars' schedule and ask whom they've beaten to deserve to be No. 8. They haven't defeated a ranked team. By the rankings, Oregon State (No. 36) would be WSU's best win.

Indeed, a 6-4 New Mexico team that has recent wins over Utah and Colorado State might be WSU's trophy victory.

What has brought the Cougars notice, apparently, is a defense so disruptive that it gives the appearance of dominating victories even when the offense is sputtering. In a reverse sort of way, WSU was impressive in beating UCLA, throwing rods and blowing radiators on offense but still winning 31-13.

Will it be impressive enough to catch the attention of the Rose Bowl if the Cougars win out and go 10-2 while USC goes to the Sugar Bowl?

Much depends on TCU. If the Horned Frogs lock up a BCS bowl, it's likely Texas and TCU take up the two at-large bids available. The absence of TCU is pivotal to WSU's chances.

Mitch Dorger, CEO of the Tournament of Roses, says the Big Ten/Pac-10 alliance is still held in great esteem by those in charge in Pasadena. Remember, there hasn't been the traditional matchup in the Rose Bowl since Washington met Purdue three years ago.

In fact, he says, the Rose Bowl people lobbied hard and got a subtle rules change in a revised BCS selection process. Last year, the Orange Bowl ended up with an attractive Iowa-USC matchup, while the Oklahoma-WSU pairing was less appealing.

Under the new format, the Orange wouldn't have been able to pick off Iowa unless the Rose chose to "release" the Hawkeyes, because their conference is "anchored" to a different bowl — the Rose.

"We made a big deal about it last year," Dorger said. "We told everybody how important it was. The BCS commissioners changed the rules so we could preserve the relationship."

That should be good news to WSU fans envisioning a matchup with Ohio State or Michigan in the Rose Bowl.

"What I am telling people is that we have a tradition of a Big Ten/Pac-10 matchup," Dorger said. "The relationship is very important to us."

Pointedly, he adds, "Read between the lines."

Dorrell's dilemma

You wonder whether first-year coach Karl Dorrell could have quieted grumbling from Bruins faithful if he had handled a tricky quarterback situation more deftly.

Matt Moore won the job in fall camp over Drew Olson, who had success a year ago as a freshman. Then Moore got hurt, and to the surprise of some, Olson lost the job again after quarterbacking the Bruins through a five-game winning streak.

Now, surprising both quarterbacks, Dorrell has tabbed Olson the starter against Oregon.

"It's one of those learning experiences you go through as an athlete," Dorrell said. "I'm sure he (Moore) wasn't excited about it."

Dough to go

Has anybody mastered the art of the big buyout better than John Mackovic, ousted Arizona coach?

When Mackovic interviewed at Washington for the UW job in 1999 after Jim Lambright was fired, he was in the middle of receiving a $1.8 million buyout from Texas after being dismissed there.

In the interest of accuracy, it should be noted Mackovic didn't just cash checks. He was reassigned to help plan a new university golf course — which, uh, might have required a round of golf here and there.

This week, the Arizona Daily Star reported Mackovic will get almost $1 million over four years from Arizona, a program that he reduced to a laughingstock.

Arizona athletic director Jim Livengood told the Star, "I think it's good for us from a financial standpoint and good for John from a tax standpoint."

Why it would be good from a financial standpoint, Livengood didn't say. The school just finished the last of three $200,000 payments to ex-coach Dick Tomey.