January 5, 2006
In-Vince-able
With all the hype surrounding the Rose Bowl and all the talk of USC being the greatest team ever, Vince Young did what he's done all year: He put the Longhorns on his back and willed them to victory.
What do you say about Vince Young? The guy stole the stage from Leinart & Bush. He was absolutely amazing - rushing for 200 yards and completing 30-of-40 passes for another 267 yards.
The 41-38 win not only crowned Texas as the National Champs, but it also reconfirmed an old sports truism - defense wins championships. Despite all the ESPN hype and all the talk of three-petes, Texas never blinked. You never got the impression that the Longhorns were intimidated by the Trojans - not at all. And while the Texas D didn't dominate the Trojans, the 'Horns were able to get key stops and frustrate USC, especially during the first half.
Congrats to Texas - National Champions and owners of the nation's longest winning streak.
Comments:
Lu said:
posted on January 5, 2006 8:40 AM — 24.105.169.66 — link — abuse?
Congrats to Texas and VY. No one knows who would be awarded with the trophy if it was released after the champs game although Bush is also great in the game. I disagree that VY stole the stage from them. He played as usual. I believe from the begening that USC is a great team and deserve #1 ranking but overrated by majority. They can be beaten by more than one team in the country. They are lucky to meet one of them at end of the season.
cwadle said:
posted on January 5, 2006 8:42 AM — 132.27.151.5 — link — abuse?
35 years in the making. It was a hellova game by both teams. Maybe the best NC game of all time. I'd like to hear tommie trojan's comments about it. He's been talking junk for five weeks predicting an SC rout. Also, I hope the program directors at ESPN can fill up an entire hour of sportscenter today without USC. Maybe they should of waited until after the game to call them the greatest team of all time. I guess SC was too concerned about '95 Nebraska to concentrate on Texas. We'll see you next year in AZ at the National Championship. Hook 'Em Horns.
USAFCCF said:
posted on January 5, 2006 9:01 AM — 131.55.121.8 — link — abuse?
Great game! This game was why college football is great. There is no way the NFL post season will compare to the BCS bowls!!! Congats to Texas and the rest of the BCS winners. (We still want a playoff) College foot ball is the most exciting football played and it's only 233 days till next season....
Fan of the Game said:
posted on January 5, 2006 9:22 AM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
Congrats to Texas on their National Championship. Vince Young was nothing short of amazing in his performance.
Nathan...I kinda have to side with Lienhart on this one. Without a doubt, Vince Young definately did more to carry his team, but I still have to think as even as these two teams are, I have to give a slight edge to USC. Not to say Texas doesn't deserve to be the champions, but USC did look like the bette team. Vince Young was definatley the difference maker for the Lonhorns. USC marched down the field on all but 2 possessions in this game, unfortunately for the Trojans, they made some risky decisions that turned the ball over to Texas. At times, Texas looked unstoppable as well, but at times they looked confused and nervous. If the Texas incompletion would have been called a reception & fumble, who knows how the game would have turned out down the stretch. Not to mention the "gift" touchdown that was not reviewed(in a game where the officials semed to review every score). Video evidence clearly showed Young's knee was down prior to the pitch( which by the way looked to be a forward latteral on the replay), but it was one of the few times the officials didn't check the replay. Were those apparent blunders enough to give Texas the win? Who knows? Allthough the Longhorn points that resulted from the calls or no-calls were enough to make the difference in the score, Texas played hard and never quit. Regardless of any officiating mistakes, the Longhorns did what they had to do to win. So if it makes any sense, YES, I believe USC is still the better team (but only by the smallest of margins) and YES, I believe Texas deserves the title, because the final score is all that matters and the Longhorns got the job done. Again, congrats to the Longhorns on a great season.Armando said:
posted on January 5, 2006 9:44 AM — 71.226.97.87 — link — abuse?
All the time before this game ESPN and just about all the websites prdicted USC would just win and never mentioned anything about the Horns. They would talk about how USC could matchup with any past national champion and whether or not they could be called the greatest ever. Did they have the greatest collage QB ever is RB the greatest running back ever and so n and so on. They forgot one thing .....the Texas Longhorns. Texas did not listen to them and played their best game of the year. VY is an amazing QB, and an amazing leader. His o-line on ESPN even said that he was never rattled at the last part of the game that he just had the confidence and the will to win. Texas is the better team and will go down in history as the better team. USC had a great run and has great recruiting.... then again .........so do the Horns. Hook'em !!!!!!!
it's better here said:
posted on January 5, 2006 9:54 AM — 66.251.34.35 — link — abuse?
I have got to give it to Texas, they came out and played like Champions. Without a doubt in my mind I would call USC a better team, but they played like crap, Leinart's head was not in the game; what was 2 or 3 delay of game calls. And can I get some containment on the right side Sc's left defensive end got beaten down the whole game VY 14yd TD to the right, 17yd TD to the right, 8yd TD to the right; your guys right tackle made him look like a punk. I want to complain about youngs lateral with his knee down, but Sc got a break with Notre dame. Calls can go either way you can't use them really as an excuse. Also SC was celebrating with 6 minutes left in the 4th, on VY's 2nd TD there were 4 SC players there and they let him walk in, one guy made a lame attempt and dove and missed him by a couple of feet. You can't play like that against a team like Texas or you will get beat. I still hate everything about texas the state, the schools, everything; but I guess I will have to keep my mouth shut for the next year or so (If Young stays you have got a great chance at repeating), because nothing shuts a man up like the words SCOREBOARD
OrangeBlood said:
posted on January 5, 2006 10:04 AM — 71.8.117.165 — link — abuse?
Everyone who reads this knows in their hearts now that Vince Young was robbed of the Heisman... He is without a doubt the best player in college football... and who knows what have happened if they had reviewed the interception at the end of the first half that was called incomplete, Huh?
PACMan said:
posted on January 5, 2006 10:08 AM — 62.215.3.61 — link — abuse?
Congrats and hats off to Texas and Vince Young. It was their night and not SC's..UT won for one reason, and one reason only! VY. Otherwise, this would have been a 2-3 touchdown victory for SC. Noone else did squat..Noone had to! They ought to erect a statue of VY on campus back in Austin, because he not only brought a Championship home, but he alone is the reason they didn't have 3-4 losses this year..Hope to hell that guy enters the draft this year..Oh, and a note to Lu and to
Cwadle, there was no other team that would have beat SC tonight, nor any other quarterback in college today that would led UT to beating SC tonight...The media spouted off about SC's greatness, but give me a pregame quote from SC that indicated they were full of themselves."We got Hooked"!...Fight On(Next Year)
Erica816 said:
posted on January 5, 2006 10:44 AM — 199.44.37.201 — link — abuse?
UT definitely wouldn't have one tonight without Vince, but so what. Each team comes onto the field with the weapons that they have on their squad and plays their strengths. If USC didn't have Reggie Bush they wouldn't have made it past Fresno State and we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Give Texas their credit.
mr. waitandsee said:
posted on January 5, 2006 11:27 AM — 71.113.188.202 — link — abuse?
ABC did a wonderfull job hosting "The USC Show" only problem is Texas ended up winning it. Didn't the Texas players have any family in the stands? If so, why only (and so darn frequently) show USC players families? Didn't any Texas Alumni show up? I started watching the game sort biased toward Texas but I thought the coverage was so lopsided I was really cheering for them at the end.
Did anyone else think the coverage was all USC? It was covered like USC was the Harlem Globe Trotters and Texas was that "other team in the white uniforms"
I have nothing against USC but allot against ABC. I really hope they don't get the bowl games next year.
I was also kind of annoyed at the long closeup shots of both kickers after thier misses in the Penn State FSU game.
And I won't belabor the point with details but sometimes I wasn't sure if I was watching the same game as the announcers.
Bob said:
posted on January 5, 2006 11:30 AM — 66.25.135.152 — link — abuse?
Fan of the Game, you still think that USC is the best team in college football. Gee, if only there were some way of determining which team is better. If only there were some type of test or competition between two teams that could show which one is better at playing football. Maybe we could develop a scoring system for our test/competition.
I don't know.
IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE WHO CAN THINK OF ANY WAY TO TEST WHICH OF TWO FOOTBALL TEAMS IS THE BEST?????????
Maybe the good people in Pasedena California can think of something.
Nah!Hook 'em.
JT said:
posted on January 5, 2006 11:50 AM — 63.228.165.18 — link — abuse?
Vince Young is incredible. Until this year, I have sworn that Charlie Ward was the greatest college quarterback ever for his ability to turn a broken passing play into a long run and his knack for the no huddle. Young, however, has a better arm and is faster & faster than Ward ever was. Congratulations to the Longhorns and Vince Young, the best quarterback in the history of NCAA football (yet not a Heisman winner).
Dan from Miss said:
posted on January 5, 2006 11:58 AM — 84.166.248.9 — link — abuse?
Congrats to Texas!
Nathan, I agree. Leinart who only lost two games in college? Unbelievable! Leinart, who had a unbelievable college career, ends his college career by being a poor remark that came across as him being a poor sportsman. He definately has to learn how to lose better.
Fan of the Game, as for the bad calls, USC wouldn't even have qualified for the national championship game if a non-call would have been made in South Bend. Bad and non-calls are part of the game.
Clifton said:
posted on January 5, 2006 12:35 PM — 24.105.169.66 — link — abuse?
2006 USC is a great team just like 2002 Miami. They are both a great man-made team until beaten by a team in reality. I do not know what I can say about those who tried to set up a best team in the college football history before a real test on that team. They must have forgotton the game Miami vs. OSU in 2003 Fiesta. They actually killed USC.
Dan said:
posted on January 5, 2006 1:36 PM — 68.83.48.218 — link — abuse?
This was truly one of the great championship games, and topped off what was a great BCS bowl lineup (after a less-than-exciting pre-BCS bowl season). Oddly enough, I was almost as happy to see USC knocked off as I was to see my Lions beat FSU.
I never heard fans talk more trash about how good their team was than USC fans did this year (consider this, USC fans, I live in Pennsylvania, and I'm rating you worse than Yankee Fans). I also would love to hear Tommie Trojan put his two cents in, after he told me I didn't understand college football for disagreeing with his statement that "there is nothing better than a QB on the run." I guess he ate those words to the tune of 200 Vince Young rush yards (about the same as Bush and White combined).
it's better here said:
posted on January 5, 2006 1:46 PM — 66.251.34.35 — link — abuse?
Hey OrangeBlood,
Young didn't get robbed of anything, Bush got it because he is the best. He put up phenominal numbers and he shared time with white, if white wasn't there bush's numbers would have been through the roof. Who did Young share time with? ya that's right nobody. He is the best all around QB hands down, so stop whining you got the Championship. Also what is this "What If," well what if they reviewed Youngs knee being down then forward lateralling? There would be a whole different outcome Sc would be champs, but they didn't. I can't believe you are whining after a win, that's just sad, I actually feel sorry for you.
The Mayor said:
posted on January 5, 2006 1:50 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Nathan,
Easy there fella, impressive potty mouth. You might want to check your "Caps Lock" button the left side of your keyboard.
These players at USC aren't used to losing so cut them some slack. The Pac-10 has to put up with their arrogance, Traveler, band and success year after year. You get used to it.
Incredible performance by VY, hope he stays around another year so that ESPN can anoint him as the second coming...he sure made Lee Corso look good (Corso has been pushing TX as the number 1 team in the country all year).
If I were part of the Burnt Orange hoard, I'd be booking a room in Tempe right now for next January.
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on January 5, 2006 2:11 PM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?
Congrats to Texas, what a great game. Too bad the heisman trophy isn't voted on after all the bowl games are completed.........It might have been a different story.
As for U.S.C, no guts no glory, but I would have made Texas move the ball 80 yds with 2:04 to play rather then 55 yds. But you don't get to be 2-time champions (Co-champs with LSU) without playing each down to win. That was the best game by far this year. Still can't beleive that most USC fans say that Texas wasn't better then they were, when it was proven on the football field. Both teams have great talent, but use the talent in different ways. USC is flash, speed and all the glamour. Their superstars are the "Skilled players". While Texas relies on a strong and tough offensive line that allows their skilled players to perform. I have heared from numerous people that Texas would not be that good without Vince Young. Well if you know Vince Young is the "only player" on the team, and you can't line-up and stop him, what does that say about him and your team ??? Hopefully Vince Young will return next year, get his degree, and win the Heisman next year. I don't even think Mack Brown has to leave the state of Texas to get all his recruits, that says something about the football program. And for those of you who think Texas was a one hit wonder, they may be, but they have been getting better every season since Mack arrived. Good luck to Reggie Bush and Matt Leinhart in the pros, they both have great futures. I think White, Smith and Jarrett will jump ship as well but that remains to be seen.JC in SoCAL said:
posted on January 5, 2006 2:42 PM — 67.113.165.178 — link — abuse?
Wow what a game yesterday. Texas errr Vince Young won a really awesome game. I think the game came down to who made more mistakes and not who was the better team, yes team not player. I am a purist when it comes to the sense of wanting a team to win and not an individual. But that was a flat out solo job by VY. Vy accounted for 60+ play of their offense. There was no structure to their offense. It was drop back and then run or it was QB draw, everytime. I don't value one man show teams over a natural team effort. And I think that is a real overlying problem for sports in general, but that is for another topic. Anyway USC had no answer whatsoever to VY running the ball. But, I think the Trojan mistakes ultimately gave Texas the game. The Reggie pitch, and I think the biggest was the timeout on the two point try at the end of the game. I would have much rather had that timeout and give them the two point than to waste it there.
Also, the one thing that did make me nervous before this game was the unbelieable hype around this team and game. I was utterly sick of hearing about USC and how great they are. I am a Trojan fan through and through, but there was only so much I could take of the superlatives and adjectives describing them and this game. Yes, I am hurt, yes I am worthless at work right now, but I think this is for the better of the USC program. USC did not bring it yesterday, Texas did. The Trojans will regroup, reload, and hopefully have that fire light back up inside and make a run for 06'.Fight on Trojans....
Fan of the Game said:
posted on January 5, 2006 2:42 PM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
Orangeblood....What everyone knows in their hearts is that everyone will debate the 2005 Heisman award for at least another year. Vince Young, may have just had the best single game performance by an individual in D-I college football game. I don't know whether he did or didn't, but I know he was spectacular. I do know that the Heisman isn't awarded for individual performance in a single game and it would be hard pressed to think that landslide victory by Bush in the Heisman voting, could be completely reversed by the events of one game. I definately feel Vince would've narrowed the gap, in any event with his Rose Bowl performance. On the other hand, if the Heisman race would have been fairly close, I can see where as Vince might have overtaken Bush. But the race wasn't close at all, so its safe to say Vince needed more than this great performance to surpass Bush as the Nations Best Player. Perhaps if Vince didn't struggle with Texas A&M to have even a decent game, the voting may have been closer. That said, I have the utmost respect for Young and definately acnowledge that he is one of the greates players in college football. Congrats to him and his teammates on a big win.
OrangeBlood said:
posted on January 5, 2006 4:07 PM — 71.8.117.165 — link — abuse?
reggies numbers were no doubt incredible... and he is unarguably an amazing athlete... however, Vince Young's stat were no less marvelous. And the "freakshow" that you witnessed was what we priviledged longhorn fans have had the great pleasure to watch all year... It wasn't an exceptional game, kids been doin' that all year. Reggie should have won last year, but won this year due to left over hype and media bias. And don't misconstrue a call for obvious injustice as whining. Whining is complaining about a call on the 10 yard line that would almost certainly ended with the same outcome... except they would have probably hit the extra point... Calls went both ways in that game, so blame your coach for not calling a timeout to force the review... he obviously wasnt shy about wasting them....HOOK 'EM HORNS
Gerald said:
posted on January 5, 2006 4:32 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Notre Dame Fan 44:
"But you don't get to be 2-time champions (Co-champs with LSU) without playing each down to win." No, you get to be 2-time champions by the media overlooking SEC teams who played tougher conference schedules (LSU and Auburn)! Remember how everyone was saying that the SEC was "down" this year? Look at the final AP poll. 3 top 10 teams. No other conference has more than 2. 5 top 15 teams. No other conference has more than 3. Check the records! 5 teams with 9 wins or more! No other conference has more than 3. Yes, I know UGA and Auburn lost! After all, it WAS a down year. But even in a down year, they had the most top 10 and 15 teams just like they did in 2003 and 2004 when the media anointed USC as clearly the best team in the country! Sorry, dude, but if USC plays in the SEC, that streak stops a long time ago.
J wells said:
posted on January 5, 2006 4:51 PM — 68.50.162.255 — link — abuse?
Where shall I begin? SC fans are in real need of a reality check! They want to have their cake & eat it too!
#1: 2 teams played, & had 60 minutes to prove who was best 1 did!
#2: If you can't get up for, & play @ your highest level for this game, you're NOT the best team!
#3: You want to complain about knee-down/forward lateral? I'll conceed that, only IF you conceed that without the illegal-non-call of the "Bush_Push" of Leinert in South Bend, UT would have been playing Penn State for the title!
#4: ONLY VINCE YOUNG!?! Wow! I didn't know he was THAT good! I saw him throw the ball, but I missed seeing him catch it! I thought I saw him run, & could have sworn I saw blockers. I think I may have even seen him on the sideline while 11 others were playing (would that have been a defense?) So lets use just a LITTLE logic. IF Young single-handedly beat SC with 2 Heisman winners, with all 11 NFL caliber players on offense, & rushed for almost as much yardage that Bush & White combined, then I guess someone owes him his rightful Heisman. Do you think Bush or Leinert will hand over theirs? I doubt it !
#5: What about Pete's "5 weeks to prepare?"
#6: "Gift Touchdown?!" SC couldn't stop VY & Co all night. Even if he would have been called down, what do you think the chances are SC would have/could have stopped him with 4 shots from the 8? They couldn't do it later on during the "here's-the-ballgame" 4th down with 26 seconds left. There were lots of non-calls on both sides. I saw LOTS of holding protecting Leinert not being called by the refs. Otherwise, he'd have spent some time on his back
#7: TEXAS 41 USC 38 Nuff Said !!
OrangeBlood said:
posted on January 5, 2006 5:50 PM — 71.8.117.165 — link — abuse?
Tony Kornheiser just said that if the heisman voting took place today, Vince Young would win unanimously. I guess I'm not the only one that seems the see the OBVIOUS truth. Cant you see... he is Leinart and Bush all in one... seriously... do you truly believe Bush could ever take over a game in the sense that Young did last night, and in every other game with the exception of the A&M game. Which incidently he handled every snap of an offensive effort that put up over 30 points... Reggie Bush is one of the most exciting running backs ever... but Young is a completely new TYPE, a Vick who is 5 inches taller, 25 pounds heavier, and demonstrates the type of leadership skills that one cannot learn, but is perhaps the most important of all football traits... Should Vince Young remain at UT next year, he will enjoy the ironic benefit of media bias based on being last year's snub, as Reggie Bush did this year... It wont be fair then either
Vince Young for Governor
Russ said:
posted on January 5, 2006 6:06 PM — 64.221.24.18 — link — abuse?
Great game! However, people who watch Texas realize that this wasn't the first time that Vince Young had done this. While he had an outstanding game, he's done this several times in his career (see last year's Rose Bowl, for example). SC fans that think SC is still the better team need a reality check. There were plenty of mistakes by both teams. When it came down to it, Texas just wanted it more. How else do you describe scoring 15 points in the final 5 minutes, and stopping the #2 scoring offense in the country on 4th and 2 with the game on the line?
Texas won, SC played well, but the better team won. Just accept it.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 5, 2006 7:16 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Tommie checks in: Great game for Texas. They did what they had to do to win the game. Great stop on 4th and one when the game was on the line. USC makes that yard and it's all over. Vince Young was spectacular and will get my vote next year. Texas should be #1 entering next year and they should stay that way until somebody beats them - period! I will never say that Texas is not the #1 team because they are now.
I felt that USC also played a whale of a game. They outgained Texas and appeared to be handling them nicely on offense. There were some questionable calls (and non-calls) that may have cost SC about twelve points. But, SC has had some breaks also along the way. So, we won't make any excuses like that. I was surprised and disappointed in the defense that Pete Carroll employed against Vince Young. He only rushed four guys all game long and had all of the LB's dropping back into coverage about eight yards deep. Well, they couldn't seem to knock the Texas receivers off the ball from that distance - so, why not rush six? The "zone coverage" that they were employing wasn't working anyway - so why not just "zone five" and rush everyone else? It's all hindsight and may not have mattered at all. But, Mack Brown did not make the same mistake. He put eight or nine in the box (wasn't gonna let White and Bush kill him) and was gonna force Leinart to win the game. Well, even though Matt threw for 365 yards, Texas was able to withstand that and get the ball back on occasion. USC could not get the ball away from Young as he was running through gaping holes in the front four. By the time that the LB's could get a hat on him - he was ten yards past the line of scrimmage. Terrible defensive play calling period. USC employed the same defense that everybody else ever used that did not work. They needed to do something different.
I had no problem with effort on either teams part. The players were all great. Mack Brown was a gracious and class act. Texas showed great heart and the will to win. They took that game at the end. USC should have never tried to play some kinda prevent defense against this guy and I never thought that they would be that stupid. I thought they might come out in a 3-4 and rush both OLB's and cover the TE with the slower of the MLB's and the RB with Rey-Rey who has 4.45 speed. But, alas, they put little pressure on Young and let him dictate what he wanted to do. Wrong thing to do! Young was great. Made no mistakes and played like a champion and now he is. End of story.
SC had their run and now it's time to start another one. That's all. We had won 44 of the last 45 or so and now it's time to move on. Next year we'll be back, and hopefully, we will not play the same woefull defensive scheme against Vince Young again.Tommie Trojan
it's better here said:
posted on January 5, 2006 9:00 PM — 66.251.34.35 — link — abuse?
You ask if bush could ever take over a game like VY did? What about Fresno he had 513 total yards VY only had 467. Anyways the real MVP was Texas' right O tackle, he used SC's end all night. If he doesn't do this young gets one TD up the middle on short yardage and doesn't brake 100yds rushing. When are the fat people gonna get some respect, if it weren't for us bush doesn't rush for even 700yds, Leinarts arm is in a sling because he can't handle the rush everybody knows it, he is going to bomb in the pros. And just to prove my point even more, how much time did VY have everydown like 6-7 seconds. Texas' front five are the MVPs and SC's line should have the Heisman. If ya over 3 bills let me hear ya say Ho, "Ho." Finally, I still hold to the fact that SC is the better team, but played like jerks, so congrats horns you earned it. You showed it doesn't matter how good you look on paper, Heart beats talent everytime.
ewitevan said:
posted on January 5, 2006 9:45 PM — 24.163.141.248 — link — abuse?
Leinhart... It's not a "sore loser" by saying he felt USC was the better team... competitors can't accept losing. That might help him in the NFL... tic. I think he handled himself well... Vince Young... Congrats on being the best player on the field last night! WOW
Pete Grossnicklaus said:
posted on January 5, 2006 9:55 PM — 12.65.156.211 — link — abuse?
First of all, congrats to UT for winning the NC. Vince Young put on perhaps one of the best performances of all times. As for who has the best "team", I would still go with USC,due to all around talent, but Texas won with a great performance from Young and their DBs. Very impressive. Young has changed the very nature of quarterback, just as Magic Johnson changed the very nature of guard in basketball when he was in college and the pros.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 5, 2006 10:20 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
I'll have to rescind my Heisman vote. For real. Reggie Bush had tremendous games against Fresno and UCLA to close out the season and Vince played so-so against Texas A&M. But, when the money was on the line - Vince Young blew up big-time. This is the money guy. Even though Reggie Bush only had a so-so game - USC had plenty of other weapons in Leinart, White and Jarrett. Not so with Texas. They only had Vince Young. Without this guy they would lose. So, in my opinion he is the "Most Valuable Player" in College Football period. If that doesn't mean Heisman - I don't know what would. It's just a dang shame that they vote for that trophy before the really "Big Games" even happen. If they had waited one more month - Vince Young would have taken home that trophy.
And, I am not wrong about anything that I said about Young before. I said, "You have got to make this guy throw it - you cannot let him run the ball". It was his running that killed USC. Leinart threw for 365 yards and it did not kill Texas. But, when a QB runs for 200 yards - you're dead! So, just because Pete Carroll chose to defense Vince Young in the wrong manner - does not make me wrong. None of that is what I would have done to slow this guy up. I would have had six guys chasing him around on every play, with two guys solely assigned, to tracking him down and killing him. That did not happen. And, the rest is history. In my mind: Texas is #1 until somebody comes along and beats them. We lost to a great team and that's all their is to it. Now, we're number two. OK, let's get ready for next year. Maybe we'll get lucky and get a rematch (very rare). But, I hope not too many of you dogs are gonna come out and say that USC was overrated. It took probably the best game that anybody ever played, in a NC Game on the "Big Stage", in order to barely squeek out a win over a team that had won 34 straight games. That is not overrated and we will be back next year. Although, I see some tough teams comin' next year in Texas, Ohio State, LSU and West Virginia. It should be wide open next year. But, Texas should be #1 with maybe Ohio State starting out #2. We'll just reload and hope to make it through "the weak Pac-10" undefeated again - and try and "steal one" from the last team left standing.Tommie Trojan
j wells said:
posted on January 5, 2006 10:43 PM — 66.44.54.46 — link — abuse?
Heisman FACTS
#1: VY was the fav after the Okla State 500 yd game (per most of the talking heads)
#2: Bush became the fav after the Fresno State 500 yd game--Fair enough--(per same heads)
#3: Who do you think SHOULD have won the Heisman if Oh, I don't know, say someone had a 500 yd game against, oh, lets just say for argument's sake a better team like for instance the 2x defending Nat'l Champ while equaling the rushing yards of their 2 top rushers @ the same time his completion % surpassed, oh lets just say the same fore-mentioned team's Heisman QB? Any educated, hell, we'll even take some uneducated guesses if anyone on the left coast would like to take one. I got a news flash.. VY's been doing this since last year... he went 27 of 29 pass completions against Colorado playing about 1/2 the game. Brings up another point. VY typically was pulled after the 1st/2nd series coming out of 1/2-time, while Carrol seemed to leave Bush, Leinert, & White in much longer, to pad their #'s I suppose. SC was lucky that as a team, this was by far not TX best performance as a team. That would likely have been the 70-3 game when ALL cylinders were hitting with scores from offense, defense, & special teams when ALL 70 points were scored with almost 8 minutes remaining in the 3rd qtr.--It could have been an EASY 120-3. Not trying to be cruel to the gracious SC fans, just the obnoxious ones who can't accept a defeat from a better team without making excuses/crying. Nothing says it better than the only issue/stat that really matters @ the end of the day---the final score!!!
FEAR-THE-STEER!!! Hook-em!
JWblah said:
posted on January 6, 2006 12:28 AM — 66.138.197.138 — link — abuse?
Trojan fans:
I hold great admiration for your program there at SC. Socal has done a great job of recruiting and I look for them to be top 10 next year in spite of a new offensive backfield
However,
Texas proved to be the better team. I am reading all over this site, "Texas may have won, but we are still the better team." SOUR GRAPES. I might agree with you that the USC offense is a weeny teeny tad, little bit better than the Texas offense (although you didn't see last night how good the young texas running backs really are, they had an off night). However Texas defense proved that it was better that your SC defense. Texas special teams are better without a doubt. The UT defense stopped the Trojan "best of all time" offense on the game winning play (we all new Vince was going to score another touchdown if he got the ball back, he does it all the time).
If I hear any more of this crap, I am going to be sick. Unknown to the Trojan faithful, Texas did not have the best game of the year last night. I believe that the UT game against Ohio State earlier this year was their best game. By the way big props to the Bucks, it's too bad the top two programs in the country play each other at the beginning of next year's season.
Matt Leinart sounded like a whiny little bitch at the end of the game. His numbers sucked in the first half after seeing a good secondary for the first time all year. The only reason he ended up with so many yards is because of the many easy passes to the flat and letting his backfield do all the work. I saw him make one play down the field, the play that resulted in a touchdown.
Vince Young deserved the heisman this year.
UT is the better team...... FINAL
cwadle said:
posted on January 6, 2006 4:51 AM — 132.27.151.5 — link — abuse?
It's obvious that Texas wouldn't of won without VY, he's the best player on the team. USC would of been desroyed without LenDale White. Bush was effectively shut down because of Texas' speed on defense, but we had no match for White's power. And we had to put 8 and 9 in the box to try which left a lot of passing lanes open for Leinart. If you want to play the what if game, what if the Patriots didn't have Tom Brady, what if the Colts didn't have Manning, what if the Bulls of the '90s didn't have MJ. You could go on and on. Get over it SC fans you lost, and VY is on our team. Maybe Mack Brown shouldn't of let him play.
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on January 6, 2006 1:30 PM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?
To Gerald
Comment #31
I meant no disrespect to the SEC or any other conference. I could really care less about either the SEC, Big Ten, PAC-10 whoever, I'm A Notre Dame fan. I cheer for ND in all sports (yes, to include the Big East, CCHA to which they are members of in every other sport).
As for SEC having the stronger schedule, I will not argue that point. I would say that LSUs performance against the Canes was outstanding and I could imagine that no team outside of USC or Texas would want to play them or Ohio State !!! But the fact remains USC cannot move its university to the SEC or LSU to the PAC-10, so the arguement will always remain. I will not debate the fact the LSU, Auburn, Georgia, Alabama and Florida are great teams. Nor will I argue the fact that the media had a love affair with USC, JoePa, Charilie Weis and Texas. But Notre Dame and USC did both play SEC teams this year and both won. Now, one could argue that playing this year's Tennessee team and Arkansas was no big deal, and those were two "weaker teams" in the SEC, but when schedules are made (7 years ago for ND) you have no idea how good a team is going to be. Voters and fans are now looking at non-coference schedules more closely. If you have a problem with the placement of weak schedules have Jay Jacobs (Auburn AD) or Skip Bertman (LSU AD) give a call to a USC, ND, Michigan or Ohio State and get them on the schedule. ND plays 1 SEC team just about every year. ND just finished a home and home with Tennessee and before that a home and home with LSU. USC will play Nebraska and ND next season. Oregon will play both Oklahoma and USC. Granted there are gaps in the schedule that provides a lull of "so-called" weak teams, but these are teams within your conference. I'm sure playing Kentucky or Auburn in Basketball is different then playing them in football. It's a conference, everyone knows that the SEC beats up on one another in football. I'm sorry that Aurburn got left out of BCS last year, that was a crime. Penn state was undefeated when Nebraska won the national championship. Because prior to the BCS Penn State was forced to play in the Rose bowl and Nebraska had to play in the Orange bowl, but the love affair with Tom Osbourne left JoePa out in the cold. Again no disrespect to any Nebraska fans, but had the BCS been into place Nebraska and Penn State would have meet head to head. Auburn was simply wrong place wrong time and got robbed. Again not saying Oklahoma was not worthy of the BCS matchup but Auburn would have made a better matchup because they were undefeated. A playoff system is needed, eliminate the Conf Championship bowl game. Keep the 11 game regular season. Have a 16 team playoff with the top 8 being the host team. Once you get to the Final four install the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta and Rose as the Tier bowl and rotate them every year. This year there were 26 bowls. The top 16 teams would take up a total of 15 bowl games. That leaves 11 bowl games for everyone else. Thus the top 38 teams will get into a bowl game. You can still divy out the money to the perspective conferences with a gaurantee cash for those teams who don't get into a bowl. That would mean that only 4 teams would play over 13 games, the same number of games 52 teams will likely play next year. There seems to be no reason for a 12th game.
The Mayor said:
posted on January 6, 2006 1:48 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
BMAC
The Orange Bowl was not a great game except for fans of PSU and FSU. It was as boring as this year's Holiday Bowl to Non Ducks and Non Sooners and their "haters."
How many Penalties were called? (21 for 162 yards)
FSU had 12 men on the field at one time and then 9 another. Excellent coaching.
How many first downs between the two teams in the third quarter? Was it zero or was it one? I think it was one and that was after a penalty I believe.
How many punts? 20, an Orange Bowl record.
Third Down Conversions? A boring 11- 38!
An OT with no points scored. Another one with only 3?
How many missed extra points and chip shot field goals? Was it 3? Was it 4? I lost count
Robinson, Weatherford and Posloszny are amazing players, these are great teams, but this was a horribly played ball game that in the end no one wanted to win. Yeah so 3 OT's make it "exciting" but the first 60 minutes were dismal. How many East Coaster stayed up until 1AM to watch it anyway?
Face it, The Rose Bowl was the real deal.
Fan of the Game said:
posted on January 6, 2006 2:05 PM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
Orangeblood...there is no need to act like 6th street idiot on a friday night. I witnessed Vince Young all damn year and in person on 6 occasions. Don't tell me you saw something that no one else saw. There is no doubt he is one exceptional athlete and heart ond soul of the Longhorn team. He had great numbers without a doubt, but something persuaded the majority of heisman voters to select Bush. If there numbers were really that comparible than I assume the final tally on votes would have been as well.
I give the Longhorns alll the credit in the world for winning the NC. I never used the "no-calls" or "calls" as an excuse for USC losing. On the contrary, I specifically stated that USC had time to seal the deal late in the game and couldn't get the job done. As far as this better team arguement, well, it's just going to have to be an arguement. I live in Texas, I am a huge fan of the Big12, but come on..even USC has had to put up with their fair share of critics over the past few years. Some of you longhorn fans are not only content in your win, but now you want to strip USC of their past National Championships. And quoting Tony Kornholer doesn't give your post any validity what-so-ever, so try forming your own opinion. So where do we stand; 1) I believe the Longhorns deserve the National Championship, 2)I do not believe that the best team always wins and neither does anyone else with half a brain., 3)I do think UT was slighted and overlooked by the media going into this game.
4) I do think Texas deserves respect, and so does USC.jwells said:
posted on January 6, 2006 5:10 PM — 68.50.162.255 — link — abuse?
Bottom line.
GREAT Game!
BOTH had GREAT plays
BOTH had NOT-SO-GREAT-PLAYS
BOTH had questionable calls
BOTH had great seasons to be proud of
BOTH schools, when down, won't be for long
BOTH had opportunities to put it awayIf the game had gone 2 minutes longer, SC wins, 4 minutes longer, Texas wins, 6 munutes longer, SC--etc. etc.
Whomever had the ball last for more than 2 minutes was going to win the game. I've been a Horns fan since my dad would take me to the games in '69-70 when they won last time. I may be bias'ed, as I'm sure SC fans are too, if they are honest with themselves, but even though I'd love to think Texas has/had the better team, I truly believe that if you lined up UT/SC 10 times, you'd likely get 5-5. Though the so-called skill players get all the hype, if you look @ both teams top to bottom, there's not a lot of difference. I'll conceed VY made a difference, & without him, we'd have likely not been there. However, the same can be said for SC without Bush. I may get the best of both worlds. Being a native Texan, VY coming back to UT, & Bush going to Houston would give me LOTS to cheer about next year! I watched UT play Ohio State & SC this year, and even though I grew up never caring too much for either, can say that both teams are top-shelf, & the coaches are a class act. I get somewhat aggrivated when my team gets 'dissed', but that's mostly from media & close minded fans. I watched the game & even when UT was down by 12, & SC had the ball, I had to admit that it had been a great game by both teams, and @ least my team didn't pull an OU,embarrass themselves. The win was just icing on the cake. If both programs just keep doing what they are doing, there will be plenty of NC's in the future of BOTH programs. There is just too much high school talent in both states to be otherwise. We (UT/SC) just need them to stay in-state. Hope we see you again. I would be proud to see my team play SC again, even if the results were reversed, if only it would be as exciting as this one was. 4th qtr, no matter who you are, if your heart wasn't in your throat, then you need to watch something else besides college football. 'Cause folks, it just don't get any better than what we saw the other night, REGARDLESS of the winner. It was just plian lights-out the best college ball game I've ever seen!
Gerald said:
posted on January 6, 2006 6:18 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Notre Dame Fan 444:
I am going to give up my SEC advocacy and start letting everyone else enjoy their conferences and programs too. I will say this: no playoffs! It is not in the best interests of the players. The networks, the coaches, the universities, and the fans would rake in piles of dough, but for the players it would be just two or three more games a year to just get thrown in a pressure cooker and get physically beat up. The bowls are better. Instead of having one winner, you have a bunch of winners! Had there been a playoff, West Virginia would have been massacred in the first round by USC or Texas, but instead they get to savor a huge victory over the SEC champs! And look at Wisconsin. Instead of being thrilled over stomping a 9 - 2 team that beat UGA and Alabama and went 13 - 0 a year ago, all they would be concerned about is not making the playoffs in their coach's last year! A playoff would be great for the big powerful monied interests but a detriment to the players. You being a fan of Notre Dame, a liberal religious school with high academic standards, ought to appreciate that fact. Notre Dame has time and time again come out against a playoff and said that they will never participate in it, and I fully enthusiastically agree with their stand even if I am a Protestant.
brian said:
posted on January 7, 2006 12:26 AM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
Bottom line, when teams win some of us get tired of the arrogance. When Miami kept winning, we were tired of Miami's arrogance, when Ohio State was winning, we got tired of them,...when USC was winning, we got tired of their arrogance. Now Texas is on their high horse and as long as they keep winning next year as the defending National Champions, the spotlight will be on them and eventually....people will get tired of their arrogance. Why is it that we hate teams who are so successful?? 'Just wait and see the hypocrissy when Texas is constantly on ESPN highlights next year and everyone will be crying about how Texas is such an overexposed program. To be honest, I don't have a problem with it,...Texas is the Best Team in the Land now because they beat the former #1 team and earned it. Whew....What a game....(I'm so glad I recorded the classic from the beginning to the end). Now they have a shot at history of becoming perhaps the BEST TEAM of ALL TIME if they win back-to-back BCS Championships in the modern era of College Football starting next season.
brian said:
posted on January 7, 2006 1:04 AM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
Notre Dame Fan 444 & Fan of the Game, I highly respect your opinions previously posted. I wish that there may be the possibility of a playoff; however, this year's National Championship validates the BCS simply because two division 1A Teams ended up undefeated. I have a friend who tells me that if USC & Texas were in tougher conferences such as the SEC or BIG 10, they would not run the table. Last time I checked, the University of Florida ran the table unbeaten for nearly two and a half years between late 1994 through the 1997. No one was talking about how strong or weak the SEC was during Florida's success back then. FSU duing their championship runs seemingly had a weak schedule in the old ACC Conference, but more than made up for their worth by playing a tough out of conference schedule year in & year our against Miami & Florida. I respect people's respect about the Strentgh of Schedule formula, but I think it's way overated. It's not Texas & USC's fault for justifying them to play in the Championship game because they were undefeated because of a supposed easy schedule. Both programs had to go 12-0 to get their regardless of the competition. I must say that both programs have been good for a long time and the Rose Bowl Championship game proved that. Both teams had each other on the ropes throughout the game and usually during those types of games, the team with the ball last ends up winning. In my opinion, the best four teams in the land this year were perhaps Texas, USC, Ohio State & maybe Notre Dame if there was some type of playoff format possible. As long as there is not. The Texas vs. USC Rose Bowl was game determined the two best teams for 2005 and the system worked. The only thing I find unfair is that Texas does not have to share controversy this year like USC did the past two years due to three possible teams in the mix for the championships for 2003 & 2004. I believe that the BCS failed at least once during those years and thought that Oklahoma was not deserving to be in at least the 2003 Sugar Bowl.
jwells said:
posted on January 8, 2006 3:22 AM — 66.44.55.7 — link — abuse?
My sometimes-not-so-humble opinion on several above mentioned comments:
Leinert is just as much a sore loser, as Vince was being portrayed as when he didn't win the Heisman. As stated in one of the posts above: "A competitor can't accept losing". Everyone ridiculed him when he said he was disapointed about not winning the Heisman. They almost laughed @ him when he made a comment about it motivating him to show who was best during the game......I submit that he did just that! As the former Longhorn coach Darrell Royal said a long time ago. "If you say you can do it, and then you go out & do it.....IT AIN'T BRAGGIN !" He just had the delicious opportunity to demonstrate it on the field with the guy that won it instead of him! Not only that but the previous winner, as well as The entire "greatest team ever!" Very simply, Either HE is the best because he-all-by-himself, as some are saying, went up against SC & it's stars & won, and/or Texas is the better team, because they slowed down LOTS of stars, when SC couldn't slow down 1! Looks like Texas PROVED it had BOTH the better team, as well as the best player. @ least 1/2 of that statement MUST be correct....Any takers on a rebuttel?!? Oh this would be so much fun!
Let's do the 1st grade math together, shall we? Now class, who would you say proved to be the BEST team?
A): The team who beat several stars?
B): The team who couldn't beat the team with 1 star?......The test is not being timed. You can take as much time as you like. Don't look @ your neigbors paper & turn it over when you are done. If you finish early, open your Logic 101 book to the 1st page & start reading on your own. The slower students may see me after class & I'll escourt you to the short bus. I'll pin a note to your chest so you don't get lost.
On a more pleasant note. I have somewhat mixed feeling about a play-off. I suppose the thing I love the most about college football, is also the thing I hate the most. The drama of 1 loss & you're done, makes it very exciting. HOWEVER, the 1 loss is devastating! That's why I think it takes HUGE balls to do what Mack Brown & Jim Tressle did this year, & are doing next year. I believe that Texas & Ohio State are 2 schools with the most starters coming back. I saw an ESPN preview for next year that says TX should be #1, & OSU should be #2. They play again, in Austin 2nd game of the season to complete the home/home commitmit in '06. #3 in the polls would only be # 3 for 1 week, as long as they don't lose! That brings me to my desire for a play-off. It gives EVERY team @ least a little wiggle-room without getting booted from the NC race. Some have suggested the bowls +1. If that was in affect this year, then instead of TX having the title outright, they would go against Penn State next week. Not only could you have 1 loss & possibly play for the NC, if, God forbid, there are up to 4 undefeated teams, they wouldn't be left out. High Schools have 15+ games per season, the Pro's have what...20? The lower divisions of college football have a play-off, as do the other sports from baseball, to water polo. I Love the bowls myself, but I don't see how having the bowls +1 would hurt. You match #1 against #2, & #3 against #4, or #1/3 & #2/4, or whatever combo,then the winners play the +1 for the title. Not perfect, but better that some previous years. The BCS just worked out by accident this year!
Regardless of how many teams from the SEC are in the "opinion" polls top 10-15, according to the NCAA's "strength-of-schedule" The Big 10 played the toughest schedule from top to bottom. The Big 12 & ACC had the best bowl records,therefore are the "best" conferences, & the SEC went .500 in the bowls. (Against "weaker"? conference opponents?) Without a play-off, the only direct comparison you can make between the conferences, is #1)Pre-conference play, & #2 the bowl season, when teams from different conferences play each other. THE REST IS 100% ABSOLUTLY NOTHING MORE THAN OPINIONS OF SO-CALLED "EXPERTS". I watch the games every week thorough-out the season, stay up late & watch the scores on ESPN, & with my trusty newspaper, cross off the teams that lose from the Polls. The average is 4-8 of the ranked teams lose from one week to the next. This goes on for 11 weeks. If the so-called experts are wrong for 11 weeks in a row, what makes us think that they all of the sudden "got it right" during the last week.Gerald said:
posted on January 8, 2006 12:54 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
brian:
"Last time I checked, the University of Florida ran the table unbeaten for nearly two and a half years between late 1994 through the 1997. No one was talking about how strong or weak the SEC was during Florida's success back then."
Actually, they were! And you want to know who one of the main ones was? STEVE SPURRIER! The SEC had great talent back then, but horrible coaching. After Spurrier humiliated the league, the SEC went out and got better coaches who modernized the league. Guys like Curly Hallman at LSU, Ray Goff at UGA, Terry Bowden at Auburn, Mike DuBose at Alabama, they were all run off and replaced. Now the question is: will the PAC - 10 do the same? Or will they spend the next ten years singing the "our only loss was to USC, so obviously we are number 2" tune like the ACC did? Or will they try to get better? Other than Arizona hiring Mike Stoops, it looks like the latter is more likely.
For instance, before Spurrier, throwing the ball in the SEC was anathema. Now, virtually everyone in the SEC throws the ball, or at least tries to. When Spurrier came into the league, the notion of AUBURN producing a #1 draft pick was RIDICULOUS, as was the idea of UGA hiring an offensive coordinator from FSU, as was Mississippi State and Alabama running west coast/pro style offenses, as was Ole Miss and Kentucky hiring PAC - 10 coaches in Ed Orgeron and Rick Brooks. And Florida hiring some spread option coach from Utah? Please. But it happened in the SEC, because the SEC is all about winning. Will it happen in the PAC - 10?
jwells said:
posted on January 8, 2006 5:49 PM — 66.44.57.18 — link — abuse?
Bummer... VY going pro. The good news is most of the power-house teams are losing their best talent too, Texas has almost everyone else returning, & looks like they have one of the top recuiting classes/incoming fresmnan according to most of the "experts". Other bad news--playing Ohio State to complete the home/home committment. Good news is Mack Brown has only lost 3 home games during his 8 years @ Texas. Should be an exciting free-for-all next year. I guess we have as good a chance as anybody.---Remains to be seen.---Good luck Vince!!!
brian said:
posted on January 8, 2006 8:57 PM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
That's an excellent point Gerald. There is no doubt in my opinion that both the PAC-10 and Big 12 Conference will be stronger because of the recent success of both Texas & USC. USC will be in rebuilding mode now and Texas is now the best team in the land until someone beats them - they're the champs. I do agree with you as probably everyone else that the SEC is without a doubt the toughest conference in the nation. What I was explaining was that it is still possible to run the table in the SEC. Florida had to have at least won 20 plus games in-a-row during their in-conference winning streak. Many faithful pro-SEC fans continue to criticize every other elite team outside their conference about how it would not possible for those teams to have long winning streaks in the SEC when Auburn did in fact run the table in the mighty SEC in 2004 - and I felt bad for the program not being able to be one of the representatives in the Championship game. My take is that it would definitely be possible for both Texas & USC to run the table in that conference or at least become SEC champions if you stuck one of those teams in that league. I know that the SEC faithful do not want to hear that, but it's possible. Alabama did it back in the day many times, so did UGA and like we're discussing now, Florida could not be beaten in the mighty SEC for more than two years during the '90s. I just think that it's total nonsense when people think that other elite teams outside the SEC are soft, but I respect the pride the SEC faithful have for their conference and their teams. That's why the SEC arguably have the most passionate fans in the nation.
The Mayor said:
posted on January 9, 2006 12:51 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Brian,
Notre Dame one of the Top 4 in the nation? Did you miss the Bowl Games?
Your statement "In my opinion, the best four teams in the land this year were perhaps Texas, USC, Ohio State & maybe Notre Dame if there was some type of playoff format possible"
I would agree with the first three but LSU was a much stronger team than ND this year and believed that both teams proved that fact in their bowl games. Even PSU was better than ND this year despite their horrible, yet winning, performance in the Orange Bowl
Hookem Horns said:
posted on January 10, 2006 12:03 AM — 24.175.254.140 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan, was you watching the same game I was watching? Vince was taking what was given to him. When Your Trojans gave him the pass he took it. When They covered and pressured, he ran. For goodness sakes he Had 267 passing yards, 200 rushing.
The refs turned their heads all night. SC was holding nearly every passing down. They turned their heads. Thanks to the better teams performance their miscuse were not successful in affecting the outcome.brian said:
posted on January 10, 2006 5:04 AM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
Mayor, I simply placed Notre Dame in there simply because of their performance against USC earlier this year (and I also know they lost to MSU also this year). Yes,...I was impressed with LSU's performance against Miami, but,..c'mon, LSU beat an underachieving Miami team and they were also beaten badly by UGA in the SEC Championship game...So,..I did watch all of the bowl games just like you. I simply placed both teams in that category in my opinion because OSU played a tough game against Texas as well as Notre Dame nearly beating USC. I am also a Penn State fan and love them very much, but I also do know that as tough as their Defense is, they simply do not have the fire power to go up against Texas' offense. Overall, I'm proud of their #3 ranking. But, this is all about the Texas Longhorns now. As much as I hate to say it...."Hook 'em Horns." and congratulations to Texas, they are the best of 2005.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 10, 2006 10:40 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Hookem,
I don't see the problem. Looks like we were watching the same game to me. Yes, USC gave him everything he needed to go wild. Yes, USC holds. They all do. Yes, Texas beat USC to the ball. Yes to everything. Texas won the game. Had USC been able to play better - maybe they could have won. But, they did not. Longhorns are Champs and deserve it. Where is the problem?
Tommie Trojan
brian said:
posted on January 10, 2006 1:50 PM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
Definitely Mayor,...I'm hoping that PSU can continue the success next year from what they started this year. They should have all of their starting players returning next year. Texas will be there next year and I'm sure that LSU will be in the mix as well as long as their team stays intact.
Texas Is Better said:
posted on January 10, 2006 7:26 PM — 204.214.145.6 — link — abuse?
did it ever occur to any of you haters that Texas MADE USC look bad? Wioth a better efense than USC, Texas pressured Leinart and made Bush look like LenDale White. Texas is the better team and did NOT play their best game. USC did play their best game. That's the real truth.
brian said:
posted on January 12, 2006 5:35 AM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
Texas is better says:
"Texas is the better team and did NOT play their best game. USC did play their best game. That's the real truth".
Although I agree that Texas was the better team because the scoreboard said so. I disagree that Texas won and did NOT play their best game.
From the game I watched, it took ALL that Texas had to stop USC and to win that game. The way I looked at it, Texas took USC's best shot and stopped them on 4th and 2. I give them all the credit. It was a great effort and was definitely the key turning point of the game. "I get it," we love our teams and will always have our personal expectations about them. I'm almost certain you expected Texas to beat USC by some type of score like 70 - 3 after the 3rd quarter in the Rose Bowl, but it's not like USC had the same talent level of such Big XII cream puffs Texas played such as: Colorado, Baylor & Kansas. Overall, the two teams were very evenly matched. That's how I saw the game.
Gerald said:
posted on January 12, 2006 11:14 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
brian:
Any league that does not have 2 teams that consistently win 10 games and 2 more teams that consistently win 8 games is weak. The SEC that Spurrier beat up on was Florida, Tennessee, and a bunch of losers. Sure, Tennessee was winning 10 games a year, but who were they playing? Curly Hallman and Gerry DiNardo at LSU? Ray Goff and Jim Donnan at UGA? Mike DuBose at Alabama? Terry Bowden at Auburn? Please. Tennessee winning 10 games back in the early to mid 90s was no different than Oregon and UCLA managing to win 20 games between them this year without beating a single ranked team (did Cal finish the season ranked? If so that was the only ranked team that either played).
As far as Texas and USC, I will say that neither team played particularly well. 4 fumbles and a should - have - been pick, 2 missed extra points, and a missed field goal by Texas. Texas also got lily - livered and did not go downfield often enough. Plus, they should have gotten the ball to Ramonce Taylor more and should have gotten the ball to David Thomas more. Texas very well could have won going away.
Meanwhile, Southern Cal DID give it away! If Norm Chow was the offensive coordinator, they win by 2 touchdowns. Stuff like the empty backfield on 4th and 1, running straight into the teeth of the defense on 4th and 2, not being creative enough with Bush ... I mean it was as if Pete Carroll thought that he was playing Arizona State and could just pound Texas into submission until they either got tired or Vince Young began to press and start making turnovers like Pinegar and Keller did. Wrong! Pete Carroll got used to having so much talent that he forgot to coach.
brian said:
posted on January 13, 2006 12:53 PM — 65.115.141.154 — link — abuse?
True Gerald, I agree that Pete Carroll & the rest of the coaching staff were maybe a little too arrogant on tht 4th & 2 call with the game on the line. But stuff like that happens when two teams such as Texas & USC are not used to losing. The two teams appeared to be nervous which was evident by early 1st quarter blunders both teams commited early in the game...those things happen in big games. But both teams were not at their best in that game!?? Spare me, If you look at it on a game perspective,...you might have a point, but in the second half, the best of both teams were on display. USC's patented 2nd half comeback, Vince Young consistently playing with the poise he has displayed in big games, Leinart displayed why he was last year's Heisman Trophy winner last year, Texas' defensive stop when they had to have it, and solid performances by LenDale White & Dwayne Jarret. And even Reggie Bush had a solid game. It was a classic football game & displayed the true characters of both programs,...period. I enjoyed the game, I'm not sure if you appreciated it or not.
To say that both teams did not play well is a huge understatement. When was the last time two teams combined for over 1,100 yards of total offense? Maybe the two defenses did not play well, but those two offenses can score on any team.
And about Florida dominating the SEC when Spurrier was the coach, maybe the SEC was not as good back then as it is now. The Gator's were undefeated in the SEC back in '95 and played Nebraska which was believed to have played in an inferior Big 8 conference back then compared to the SEC even then, and spanked the Gators 62-28. Does it explain the strength of the conferences? No, it's all about coaching. Nebraska had it back then, Florida did not. The SEC conference was not responsible for Florida's performance, but I partially blamed Steve Spurrier for not preparing his players for that championship game. They sure looked arrogant back then thinking that they could throw the ball all over Nebraska all game long and it backfired badly.
Texas had slightly better coaching than USC in that game and the final results proved it. Pete Carroll & USC were a little bit too cocky, arrogant & overconfident when they were up by 12 points. They may have started to relax a bit and they paid for it. I respected Mack Brown's coaching strategy when they did not throw the ball deep too often, they just kept it simple with excellent timing pattern pass plays to their receivers when Vince Young had to throw the football. The Texas staff knew how opportunistic USC's defense always has been. USC thrived on interceptions & takeaways all year long to put teams away. Texas kept the game plan simple, and that's all you need to do to win.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 13, 2006 10:49 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Sometimes, Gerald, I think you sound reasonably unbiased. Those are very good observations. And, I really beleive that a great coach can forget how to coach when he has way too much talent. That is kinda the way I saw it. I saw USC really trying to play smash-mouth football against a smash-mouth team. And, that wasn't really their style anyway. It was almost to try and prove a point. We'll Vince wasn't playing smash mouth - he was just gone. Both teams made mistakes, usually forced by their opposition, and it was a really great game. USC has no reason to hang it's head over a loss to that great Texas team. It always takes a great team to beat a great team. Too bad that Vince went pro. It would have been interesting to see how high the Texas streak could have gotten to before they ran smack dab into another great team like themselves.
Tommie Trojan
fan said:
posted on January 22, 2006 11:26 PM — 206.174.16.188 — link — abuse?
i think both texas and usc have classy teams. but to hear one fan say we would have lost if they call vince down on the lateral. we would still have had a first on around the 12. maybe we don't score, doubtful, but possible. But rewatch the game. Kelson definitely had an interception not called. It was 16 to 7 and we would have had the ball at midfield. If we get that interception it changes the whole landscape of the game
Scott Cavanaugh said:
posted on May 8, 2006 10:35 AM — 152.1.141.153 — link — abuse?
USC was definetelly the better team. Now that you think of it, they might have had the greatest offense of all time. I am a die hard Ohio State fan and saw the Texas Ohio State game in person. Texas had one of the best defenses in the country last year. I saw the athleticism close up. Their D-Line was rediculous. USC was so good they put up 567 yards against this defense. I dont think a single team averaged more than 567 yd/game last year and USC put that up on Texas? Its insane. I would like to say though that Texas had a great team and was deserving of the national championship. It does prove in the end that great defense wins over great offense, something i happen to agree with completely.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
Nathan said:
posted on January 5, 2006 7:46 AM — 71.224.238.160 — link — abuse?i CAN'T BELIEVE THAT MATT LEINART SAID THEY STILL HAD A BETTER TEAM. mATT LEINART DOSEN'T EVEN COMPARE TO VINCE YOUNG. i HOPE MATT IS A BACK UP FOR THE REST OF HIS CAREER. hE IS SUCH AN ASSHOLE AND A COCKY SON OF A BITCH.