I like SMQ a lot and I know BN likes that blog a lot too. And it looks like SMQ just joined up with SBN.

So I hate to this. The guy totally fumbled his Pac-10 preview this week. This is from his Pac-10 preview predicting UCLA to finish 6th in the Pac-10:

6. UCLA
The other side of the coin, the fortuitous team that preyed on many a hapless secondary and Lady Luck's near-boundless favor to win ten must be due to revert to the mean, which, under Karl Dorrell, has been about six wins. L.A. could top that by a game, maybe two. But the hammering it took in two losses late in the season is an ominous sign; how many teams go 6-2 in-conference and are outscored overall by opponents by five touchdowns? SMQ knows, he knows, Ben Olson brings the lefty pain (and over-aged Mormon mission karma), but that fortune, sans the Drews, cannot continue.

So SMQ is going along with all the other national pundits who are predicting Bruins to finish somewhere from 5th to 8th in the Pac-10.

This doesn't jive with SMQ's UCLA preview (commented on here)early in the summer when he predicted us to win 8, may be 9 games (bolded mine):

Nine wins is certainly not out of this world, though SMQ thinks this looks like an 8-4 kind of team. That may sound like a step back, but given the chips-in-the-right-place way UCLA clawed to last season's success, overall progress - especially in the all-important SC affair - might not necessarily lead to more wins in the short term.

So I wonder what is it? If he thinks UCLA can win 8-9 games, why predict us to finish 6th in the Pac-10?

Anyone else see the disconnect here?

Needless to mention his ASU prediction (to finish 3rd in the Pac) may already be looking a little shaky.

Go Bruins.