Jackson Williams at the FanHouse posits that in 2010, it will be the same three teams at the top of the Pac-10: USC, California and Oregon.

I disagree.

It's 2006 right now, so we're talking four and a half seasons outward projection, nearly half a decade.  If there's one thing we know about the Pac-10 it's that the league evolving.  Every single team has won a conference title in the last 15 or so years.  In 1998 and 2000, USC was on the ropes, looking for a new coach.  In 1996 and 2005, the Trojans were playing in major bowl games.  Ty Willingham left Stanford for Notre Dame and returned to Washington in that span of time.  UCLA's had a 20-game winning streak and national title hopes and now sits mired in mediocrity.  Oregon State won a BCS game and is now in the dumps.  Things happen all the time in the league, that's just how things work.

USC is poised to stay near the top, but are already showing some cracks.  California looked to be on the decline last year, and are now the presumptive conference favorite.  Oregon was on the ropes until they hired Gary Crowton to run their offense last year and suddenly they're among the conference elite.

Constant evolution is the way of the league in recent years, and that looks to continue.

Additionally, we know one big thing: Washington and UCLA won't be on the lagwagon forever.  More than any other conference schools not named USC, those two are established programs with big names and enough winning tradition to get up to speed in a hurry with improved coaching or recruiting.  Count on a rebound from one or both within the next five years.

I believe USC has the talent and momentum and Cal the coaching to remain key figures in the league for a few more years, but everything else is fluid.  Job openings may emerge soon enough at Stanford, Oregon State and Arizona State, tremendous opportunities all for a quality coach to be hired and compete within the league and nationally.  To project any stability at the top of this particular league is usually guesswork, at best, no matter the logic and justification.

Nobody knew Cal would emerge just five years ago, or USC for that matter, but here they are.  The big questions now are 1)how long can they keep this up, 2)who will emerge to take their place and 3)how will their successors have done it?

Those two are simply the next in line in having replaced the old order before them (such as the Northwest Revolution in the early 2000's, UCLA, Arizona and Stanford in the late 1990's, etc. etc. etc.).