Posted by ESPN.com's Ted Miller

This is going to be a regular Tuesday feature.

Brazeau from West Linn, Ore., writes: I'd appreciate your thoughts on the pre-season rankings. Seems to me that a team failing to be ranked in the pre-season Top 15 has a tough climb getting to a BCS bowl game, particularly if that team is from the Pac-10. Why not scrap the preseason polls altogether and begin ranking teams about five games into the season?

Ted Miller: This is a frequent complaint from media and fans: "Why not wait until a few games into the season before ranking teams." We don't wait because folks love polls and lists and rankings. As for teams that don't get a high preseason ranking, it's actually not that hard to earn your way in. They should schedule ambitiously and beat good teams. Moreover, when I've voted in polls, I penalize teams with soft schedules even if I ranked them highly in the preseason. For example, I voted Texas Tech 10th in my vote for ESPN.com's Power Rankings. Why? Because I think Texas Tech is really good. But because of the Red Raiders' cowardly scheduling philosophy, I will only push them down as they play Eastern Washington, Nevada, SMU and Massachusetts, and they won't have a chance to move up until Oct. 4 when they play Kansas State. At that point, my guess is they'd be around 15th, and their athletic director should be ashamed for making his loyal fans actually pay money to see these ridiculous games.

Mike from Boston writes: I wanted to ask you two questions regarding the decision to start Kevin Riley at QB for Cal. Tedford stated that Nate Longshore would also play against Michigan St. so I was wondering what you saw his role being, and how much playing time do you think he will get. Secondly I was wondering how they were planning to use Riley's mobility would it be only a last resort when all receivers were covered, or will they implement designed scrambles?

Ted Miller: I asked Jeff Tedford about Longshore's playing time today, and he said that he has yet to make a decision. My guess is that if Riley is burning it up against Michigan State, Tedford will be slow to make a change. If Riley is merely doing OK, my guess is we'd probably see Longshore in the second quarter. Then, after halftime, Tedford and new offensive coordinator Frank Cignetti likely would adjust their plan according to what they'd seen. As for Riley's scrambling ability, I doubt the Bears will adopt too many designed QB runs. Riley's mobility does mean he can make positive plays when protection breaks down. I also wouldn't be surprised to see more designed roll outs.

Jordan from Eugene, Ore., writes: Ted, Give me the best reason why Oregon doesn't beat USC this year. Obviously after last year's beating in Eugene it was obvious that USC couldn't handle our offense. Everyone says the D-Line is weak yet we have tremendous D-ends. With the secondary we have that can't be matched by any other team in the country, it will allow us to free up all those LB's for the run. I don't think there is a receiver playing for USC that any of the three stars in our secondary couldn't cover man to man for most of the day.

Ted Miller: My best reason? You mean other than USC's players are better? What do you mean 'USC couldn't handle the Oregon offense'? The Ducks won 24-17, their lowest point total in a win on the season by 11 points. And I wouldn't casually write away issues on the interior D-line -- that would get a big forehead slap from any defensive coordinator. And the Ducks secondary is as good as any in the country, but I would suggest playing man-to-man "most of the day" vs. USC would be a big mistake. The Trojans receivers underachieved last year. I've got a feeling we won't see a repeat of that.

David from Agoura Hills, Calif., writes: What is your prediction for the Stanford-Oregon State game on Thursday? I personally think the Cardinal will win. Even though Oregon State has dominated the Cardinal the past few years, I think this year because Oregon State has quite a few offensive issues, and Stanford's defense is on the rise, the Cardinal will be able to pull it off.

Ted Miller: My prediction for the Stanford-Oregon State game: painnnnnnn.

Just call me Mr. T.

I think this is going to be a really tight game and I've gone back and forth on it. But my final verdict is . . . predictions come Thursday.

Kevin from Los Angeles writes: Will any team in the Pac-10 stay close to USC in a game and who?

Ted Miller: Absolutely. USC has lost seven games since 2002 and five of those defeats came to Pac-10 teams -- the last regular-season loss to a nonconference foe was to Kansas State on Sept. 21, 2002. Last year, the Trojans lost two Pac-10 games (Stanford and Oregon) and won three other conference games by a touchdown or less.

Someone will challenge the Trojans this year. Probably more than one team.

Will someone beat the them? USC has lost two Pac-10 games each of the past two seasons, so the odds are good that the Trojans won't go undefeated in the conference.

Who? The easy answer would be Oregon, Arizona State or California, and I'd take Oregon first out of that group (though not with the zeal of Jordan from Eugene above).

But my longshot is this: USC heads to Arizona on Oct. 25, the second of back-to-back road games. Hmm.

Darryl from Oakland writes: Now that the season is about to begin, are you sticking with your original predictions for the Pac 10, or are you feeling the urge, because you know it's true, to move Cal into the #2 slot.

Ted Miller: Yes, for now, I'm sticking with Oregon, though a lot of that prediction was based on all the great things I'd heard about Nate Costa, who's now out for at least eight weeks with a knee injury. I get to see the Ducks Saturday against Washington, so I'll get a first-hand look. And the great thing about the new ESPN.com conference blogs is I get to redo my power rankings every Monday. As for Cal, let's just say my esteem for them is higher after watching them practice. Let's see what happens this weekend with Michigan State.

Eric from Portland writes: What are your thoughts about Roper being the quarterback for the Ducks? Was the Sun bowl a fluke in your mind? Nobody around here seems to know how effective he will be in the spread system.

Ted Miller: The Sun Bowl was very impressive, but I thought that was as much about the Ducks regaining their mojo and remembering they were a good team, even without Dennis Dixon, not to mention it was a fabulous offensive game plan. I saw Roper in the spring and he was inconsistent. Also, my impression was he and offensive coordinator Chip Kelly weren't on the same page, and that Kelly was much higher on Costa. But the word from every media outlet, as well as head coach Mike Bellotti, was that Roper had been outplaying Costa of late, before the injury. So we shall see. Seems like Roper coming on late while hearing everyone handing the job to Costa demonstrates some mental toughness. One Duck fan in the mailbag called me an "idiot" for suggesting that the spread-option elements will be limited with Roper. Let me restate that: The spread option elements will be limited with Roper, who is a skinny guy with good speed, not an option quarterback like Costa.