September 19, 2005
Southern Cal ruining college football?
You cannot blame Arkansas coaches for struggling to find the right words after the Trojans mauled them 70-17 this past Saturday night. But what do you make of UA defensive coordiator Reggie Herring's take on USC?
"They’re the best team I’ve ever seen," Arkansas defensive coordinator Reggie Herring said. "They need to hurry up and graduate, because if they don’t, they’re going to ruin college football."
Ruin college football? Come again?
There have been many dominant teams in the history of college football--and some arguably more dominant than the current USC squad--but I fail to see how any of them have "ruined" the game. Perhaps they ruined life for many mediocre coaching staffs struggling to hold onto their jobs, but you cannot say the game itself was tarnished.
Ignoring NCAA rules might ruin college football.
The NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions has placed the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, on three years probation due to violations primarily centered around impermissible employment in Dallas of a number of men's basketball and football student-athletes. The case concerned violations of NCAA bylaws governing extra benefits, recruiting and financial aid.
Player-buying scandals might ruin college football.
Lang also told jurors that Arkansas offered him either an assistant coaching job worth more than $80,000 a year or $150,000 in cash if he delivered Means and another player.
Poor off-the-field player conduct might ruin college football.
Nutt has been criticized for a lack of discipline on his teams and a number of his student-athletes have had off-campus arrests for DUI and other offenses.
Superb and dominant play by the USC Trojans will not ruin college football.
Now, to be sure, I expect that Herring was using hyperbole when discussing the Trojans' talent. And you have to credit the Razorbacks for taking on Pete Carroll's squad on a day when fellow SEC teams were playing the likes of Ball State, Indiana, Louisiana-Monroe, and Tulane in non-conference tilts.
However, if the idiots that run college football and the BCS haven't ruined it, I don't expect the Trojans OR the Razorbacks to be able to ruin it, either.
Comments:
brent shapiro said:
posted on September 19, 2005 4:32 PM — 128.125.70.218 — link — abuse?
Yo Jeremy,
what was oklahoma last year. the ywere said to be the best team ever assembled in college football. Wait till we maul texas in the rose bowl. You cant say a team thats gonna win 3 staright championships is a fluke. our offense is unstoppable, but your proably are a UCLA fan, i know it hurts.paulwesterdawg said:
posted on September 19, 2005 5:02 PM — 64.238.123.108 — link — abuse?
The only thing that is going to ruin college football is programs that field unwatchable teams.
Reggie Herring set defensive football back 30 years. Houston is ruining that program with his inability to recruit better players.
posted on September 19, 2005 6:04 PM — 68.35.231.61 — link — abuse?Mike Boone said:
The important thing is that USC is only ruining the game for those that can't adapt to their style of play. A team like Arkansas with few athletes can't compete with SC right now due to the players on the field. The right team with the right scheme will knock Southern Cal off their pedestal before too much longer.
George said:
posted on September 19, 2005 6:37 PM — 198.203.175.175 — link — abuse?
Too bad the right teams to knock SC off their pedestal are all playing on Sundays. As for a weak schedule, look at what the Pac-10 did this weekend in their non conference games. SC is just that much better right now.
Cumberland Ave said:
posted on September 19, 2005 7:03 PM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
First, let's debunk this whole three-peat mythology surrounding SoCal.
The BCS champion two years ago was LSU. Did SoCal play or beat LSU? No. SoCal won a fictional, pollsters' national championship two years ago.
Last year, the BCS gave us SoCal versus an overrated Oklahoma. Did SoCal play or beat undefeated Auburn? No.
SoCal hasn't exactly blown away all its opponents either. Just last year, the Trojans struggled against Virginia Tech, Stanford, California, Oregon State and UCLA en route to its BCS championship.
For those with short memories, here are the scores:
USC 24 VaTech 13
USC 31 Stanford 28
USC 23 Cal 17
USC 28 Oregon State 20
USC 29 UCLA 24
Anyone who actually watched those games knows just how close SoCal came to having a mediocre season in 2004-05.
Please don't suggest that Texas will be a worthy opponent in a BCS championship game. Are there any good teams in the Big 12 this year other than Texas?
Who cares if SoCal has blown out Hawaii and Arkansas, one of this year's worst teams in the SEC?
Anyone care to suggest a team this year that has a good enough run and pass defense to beat SoCal?
I don't think there is an opponent so far this year that has even the potential to be as good as Auburn a year ago and LSU two years ago.
If SoCal wins the BCS championship this year, it will probably still be a joke. Where's the worthy competition this year?
It's too bad that the BCS could not give us LSU versus SoCal two years ago and Auburn versus SoCal last year.
Will the BCS system fail football fans again this year? Is the BCS ruining college football, too?
SC Fan said:
posted on September 19, 2005 7:11 PM — 12.28.137.34 — link — abuse?
Those who say SC is not the best team in college football or hasn't been for the past three years, are either delusional or UCLA fans.
The Pac-10 is the best conference in America as far as talent goes. Just look at the number of Pac-10 players that play on Sundays.
USC not the best team? You have a long way to go understanding college football.
VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 19, 2005 7:29 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
Come on guys, don't hate on the Trojans. Until they go down they are the Champs. They have a complete team, much like Miami in it's heyday. Until someone proves they can be beaten, the rest of us will have to admit it. But UCLA and Notre Dame should give them a good fight.
Casey said:
posted on September 19, 2005 7:42 PM — 71.104.96.62 — link — abuse?
Note to any and all clear thinkers:
Cumberland Ave has been spreading a hate campaign against USC on almost every Fanblog post I've read lately. Truth is that Cumberland Ave is actually TREV ALBERTS in disguise. Having lost (given up) his spot on ESPN's Gameday, Trev is now using Fanblogs as his platform to hate on USC and the Pac-10.
How's life, Trev?
kidomaha said:
posted on September 19, 2005 7:45 PM — 68.13.135.174 — link — abuse?
Hey Lost on Cumberland Ave:
USC will be going for their 3rd consecutive AP national title. No other team has achieved this during its duration. The AP is typically considered the more respected of the polls, largely because there aren't an restriction on whom may be voted for.
LSU did win the National Championship in 2003, in the coaches poll. LSU's title was less mythical than USC's. They simply got the nicer trophy that year.
The fact that three coaches voted for USC even after they were instructed to vote for the OU-LSU winner shows how much respect that team had. (Remember that P. Carrol didn't vote in the poll.)
Pointing out that SC has had close games, shows that perhaps competition in the Pac10 is greater than most give it credit for. Cal had a late season melt down triggered by a number of high profile injuries. Sanford and ucla both loathe USC and leave everything on the field, which is more than some of the other non-conference teams can say in the Pete Carrol era.
As for how SC has fared against SEC team lately, call Auburn and Arkansas. While Auburn and USC did meet last year, they beat the tigers the two previous years. Auburn may be crying on the outside, but nobody on that team wanted to face USC again, after losing at home 24-0 to open 2003.
Who might USC host in the Rose Bowl? Maybe Texas, maybe Virginia Tech, but my hope is that SC can finish its argument as best team ever by destroying another over-inflated SEC team. While it doesn't matter whether its Florida or LSU, there would be a certain sense of poetic justice to battle LSU.
jessi said:
posted on September 20, 2005 12:45 AM — 84.254.188.2 — link — abuse?
USC has done nothing but beef up there roster for the last 3 years, and to compare now to then is simply unfair. LSU is a good team but USC has basically a pro team over there, and considering everyone they play in the pac-10 is a warmup game they will probably win it again. Then there is more recruits for them to build on next year. I dont hate on USC, but i do beleive that they are in a week ass conference, that allows them to go undefeated and end up getting the best recruits in the nation. Kinda unfair to the other good team who actually have to work at it.
Jarred said:
posted on September 20, 2005 12:46 AM — 12.178.128.91 — link — abuse?
No playoff is ruinng college football.
Preseason polls is what it's all about
USC could win every game by one point and play for the title and someone like Arkansas COULD win every game by 25 and not because they may or may not be ranked high enough to pass everybody.
About the TOP Ten are the only ones with a shot.Greg said:
posted on September 20, 2005 1:24 AM — 68.2.133.14 — link — abuse?
USC victories in the last three years:
Top 5 Auburn (twice), including shutout in Auburn
#3 Iowa (Blew them out)
#3 Michigan (Blew them out)
#2 Okalahama (Not one person pick SC to win the game)
#6 Washington State
#10 Notre Dame (2002 they were in top ten, 3 straight by 31)
#7 Cal
Top 15 ASU (twice by more than 30 points) ASU dominated LSU
Top 10 V Tech who almost beat your unbeatable Auburn
Undefeated over another 11 victories over Top 25 teams.Bottom Line: SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and ACC ARE OVERRATED
SCOREBOARD - Deal with it!
GODUCKS said:
posted on September 20, 2005 7:03 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Peaple were saying that same stupid shit last year when U.S.C. played UofO.Peaple have been saying the same stupid shit about the pac10 for a long time and every year top teams lose or almost lose to the pac 10 teams that you call weak.
Every one of your so called teams have came to play the pac10 at one point in time and came away with a loss or come verry close to doing so.
Any one remember when LSU almost lost to oregon state or when USC beat Auburn or when Michigan lost to Oregon.That was the worst Oregon team I have ever seen and Michigan lost.
Talk all you want,But we all know the truth and once again the pac10 will rise.
I hope that the ducks win Saterday, but I dont think it will happen.USC will have some close games this year,but thay are going to blow out ANY non-pac10 teams thay play.Watch and see.At the end of the year you will only have your "what ifs" and your bullshit to get you to next year.Dont stress. We will always have stanford for you to pick on so that you can brag that you beat a pac10 team.
Glenn said:
posted on September 20, 2005 11:46 AM — 134.173.75.183 — link — abuse?
Hey Casey, why were none of those teams considered overrated until they got beat by USC? Is that the litmus test? If SC beats them then they are overrated? How about the Big 12 being overrated? Teams like Kansas, Baylor, and well pretty much anyone besides Texas and OU don't exactly strike fear into the hearts of many teams. BTW the same Auburn team that went 13-0, the same Va Tech team that nearly beat Auburn, Oklahoma who played in three straight national championship games are all overrated? Come on not all of them were overrated. The fact is this is a special group of players and we should sit back and enjoy them play whether or not you are an SC fan. These are a good group of guys too. Leinart, Bush, White, and the rest they don't get in trouble, they just come out and win every time they lace it up. Like i said enjoy it while it lasts because next year they will be playing on Sundays.
Cumberland Ave said:
posted on September 20, 2005 11:53 AM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
Hey guys,
USC has a great team, but I don't buy into this media hype about a three-peat.
It's my understanding that the NCAA decided to crown its football champion in the BCS championship game. USC did not play in the BCS championship game in 2004. USC did win it against Oklahoma in 2005. We still don't know if USC will even make the BCS championship game in 2006.
USC can only claim back-to-back #1 rankings at season's end in the AP poll, which is a respected poll, but it does not determine the college football Div. 1 champion.
As for those years that USC beat Auburn, I ask you how many SEC teams beat Auburn in those years? If memory serves me well, Auburn did not even win the SEC West the two years in which USC beat them.
When was the last time that Southern California or any Pac 10 team for that matter beat the winner of the SEC West or the SEC East? Do we have to go back to the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s or has USC beat the winner of the SEC West and/or the SEC East more recently? I do not know. I am simply asking. I look forward to accurate answers.
Cumberland Ave said:
posted on September 20, 2005 12:07 PM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
Hey guys,
Visit here to find a list of SEC champions from 1933 to 2004 and SEC East and SEC West champions from 1992-2004.
Please report back to us SEC fans about how often Pac 10 teams have beaten SEC East, SEC West and SEC champions in the past eight decades.
Cumberland Ave said:
posted on September 20, 2005 12:28 PM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
Dear USC and Pac 10 fans,
I offer my apologies regarding my comments about the mythology of a USC three-peat. It turns out that USC did in fact win three years running in the Matthews poll in 2002, 2003 and 2004.
I refer you to http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html
There you will find a list of past NCAA Div. 1A football champions in all the polls from the beginning of polls to 2004.
You will search hard and long to find a Pac 10 national champion in the majority of the reputable polls such as BCS, AP, UPI, ESPN, USA Today, etc.
Other than USC, only Washington and UCLA have shared national championships in NCAA Div. 1A football since the 1950s!
Prior to 2000, the most recent Pac 10 team to share a national title was Washington in 1991 when they split the votes with Miami.
Southern California has not been dominant since the 1960s and 1970s until its recent run of three Matthews championships, two AP championships and ONE BCS championship!
Learn how to play some defense against some real teams on a consistant basis Pac 10 and then and only then will you win the respect of fans in the SEC.
Cumberland Ave said:
posted on September 20, 2005 12:47 PM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
Hey guys,
SEC college football teams have won or shared 41 NCAA Div 1A national titles in the game's history.
Alabama, LSU, Tennessee, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Arkansas, Ole Miss and yes even Vandy have all won or shared a national title in college football in the game's history.
The Pac 10 can claim USC, UCLA, Washington, ASU and perhaps some others. Am I missing anyone PAC 10 fans?
I suggest you create a football legacy other than USC and UCLA before you start denigrating the SEC teams and ranting on about the college football superiority of the Pac 10.
Erik said:
posted on September 20, 2005 1:02 PM — 216.163.247.1 — link — abuse?
The SEC is far and away the Best College Football Conference In America. Try and tell me that USC would go undefeated just as easily if they faced off against LSU, Florida, UGA, UT, Alabama and Auburn every season! That's Laughable.
All of these SEC teams would have alot more "national championships" if they played in the PAC-10 cause they wouldn't have that one or two tough losses every season.
posted on September 20, 2005 1:19 PM — link — abuse?
I love the SEC, but I think I'm about ready to say that Southern Cal would go undefeated in the SEC. There is no question in my mind that they would have mauled Auburn last year, and the Tigers ran the SEC table.
The overall level of competition is higher in the SEC, but...Southern Cal? As much as it might pain me to admit it, Southern Cal is the real deal.
Kendall PRice said:
posted on September 20, 2005 1:49 PM — 208.190.198.201 — link — abuse?
Reggie Herries comments are a bit ridiculous. Herring helped the score with not being able to back up his words before the game with a defense that even looked competent. At some point USC will come back to earth as all of these great programs do. But I do wish the writer had used some perspective on the real deal behind the 'scandals' he mentioned in regard to the Arkansas program. The smoldering smells he left on the table in the blog in reality were a lot different than the impression he leaves the reader with. Lets leave the stinking to the game we just played.
Maurice said:
posted on September 20, 2005 2:09 PM — 208.17.179.33 — link — abuse?
This a stupid statement. USC is not ruining College football. The BCS and Bowl system is ruining college football. Division I-A needs a playoff.
I am happy for USC and The PAC 10. West Coast Football is alive in well especially in LA CountyCumberland Ave said:
posted on September 20, 2005 2:49 PM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
Hey guys,
I am not attacking USC, but I think the three-peat stuff is just media hype.
USC has a great team and has had a great team for the past three years, but that alone does not make a case for the superiority of the Pac 10 over the SEC.
As for those USC wins over Auburn in 2002 (24-17) and in 2003 (23-0), one must keep in mind that Auburn was overrated in preseason in 2002 and ended with an overall record of 9-4. Three SEC teams beat Auburn in 2002. In 2003, Auburn finished with a record of 8-5. Four SEC teams beat Auburn in 2003.
Let's look at the Pac 10's recent record overall in Bowl games.
2004 3-2
2003 4-2
2002 1-3
2001 2-3
2000 3-2
1999 1-4Wake Forest even beat two Pac 10 teams in bowl games during that period.
Let's not forget recent USC non-Pac 10 losses:
2001 10-6 to Utah
2001 27-16 to Notre Dame
2001 10-6 to Kansas State
2000 38-2 to Notre Dame
1999 25-24 to Notre Dame
1998 30-10 to Florida State
1998 28-19 to TCUI would have liked to see USC vs. Auburn in 2004-05 and USC vs. LSU in 2003-04.
The BCS is not the answer. Give Div. 1A NCAA college football fans a playoff and a legitimate, undisputed national champion. One does not find it in USC
William Rainey said:
posted on September 20, 2005 3:51 PM — 68.47.141.188 — link — abuse?
How quickly you Pac-10 fans forget that the second best team in the conference last year(Cal) got demolished by Texas Tech which wasn't even the second best team in it own state let alone its own conference(Big-12). The pac-10 with the exception of USC is a bunch of overrated soft teams that just wouldn't make it in any other conference besides maybe the MAC, WAC, or the pathetic Big East. Maybe Washington will be good after a few years, but that's about it. Nothing could prove my point better than Stanford losing to I-AA UC-Davis. I'm still laughing at that one.
As anybody else noticed how many "USC fans" have come out of the woods since they started winning?How many of you people were fans ten years ago?
These fair weather fans are part of what is hurting college football. PICK A PROGRAM AND STAY WITH IT.As a Razorback fan it pained me to see the USC game, but at the same time I can appreciate a great team when I see one. I don't think they would have beaten LSU in '03 but they could have beaten Auburn last year and no one will come close to beating them this year. And they aren't ruining college football they are giving it a standard and a villian at the same time. They are college footballs New York Yankees and evryone loves the Yankees, right?
Link said:
posted on September 20, 2005 3:57 PM — 68.181.247.173 — link — abuse?
As for all the SEC fans, the big-10 fans, and everyone else who is damn certain that USC is not the best team in the nation, consider:
USC has won more national championships than any other team. We've had 6 heisman trophy winners. We're averaging 67.5 pts a game, more than the usual college basketball team scores.
And as for the argument that SC wasn't dominant in the past and that the PAC-10 sucks, that was then and this is now. As for the SEC's bowl teams last year, they went 2-3 (I believe this is correct, if I'm wrong, sorry, either this or 3-2). Not that great a record. At least, no greater than the other major congferences.
Furthermore, regardless of what arguments are made about USC's past two seasons, the fact is this: They are kicking the crap out of every team their playing, in conference, and out of conference. They're not unstoppable, i'll agree(their secondary needs a LOT of work) but show me a defense that can stand up to USC's offense. And when that happens, it'll be a fun game to watch.
Norm Chow said:
posted on September 20, 2005 4:09 PM — 132.1.207.21 — link — abuse?
You guys are completely funny! YES, USC is going for a 3-PETE!!!! 2 years ago: USC ranked #1 in both polls and blew out Michigan. LSU sqeaked by Oklahoma ('nuff said). LSU had to be BcS champ but only by a technicality. Last year: USC #1 all year and blows out Oklahoma. Yes Okies were weak and the Big 12 and Big Ten are the most overrated conferences in the history of college sports. Oh yeah, USC is now a record-setting 23 weeks in a row at #1!! Come on but that is pretty damn impressive considering all the other "pro"/college teams through the years - Okla, Nebraska, Miami. This year, who knows but USC looks incredible. Defense is the key as alot of new faces. SEC has always been the best conference in US but PAC-10 is back. All this is a moot point though until we get a playoff like every other CFB division.
Norm Chow said:
posted on September 20, 2005 4:18 PM — 132.1.207.21 — link — abuse?
Jeremey says "play some real teams" Oh like Texas playing Louisian Monroe! Or maybe like Ohio St playing San Diego....ooooooo!!!!
USC has played those "tough" teams in the past 3-4 years and every one of them have been crushed!!! As for leagues, PAC-10 has Stanford but SEC has Vandy (oh they still have a football team?), S Carolina. ACC is an absolute joke; Fla St with only like 8 losses since joining league; yeah that's tough! Only ND plays a true tough schedule every year; god I hate those guys!! Every team and every conference has ups and downs; now is time for USC and PAC-10!!VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 20, 2005 4:39 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
Kevin said it well, USC would probably go undefeated no matter what conference they were in, for people to say it's not fair, they have better players and we don't is borderline stupidity. I hated the Canes and Noles when they were smokin' hot, simply because they had what UT didn't and still doesn't. I watch their games and highlights and just laugh because they ARE that good. Sure there are teams that can hang with them, but I bet nobody, NOBODY wants to play them right now. Everyone acts like USC has an unfair advantage, I guess they do, since they ARE better than anybody else. Give credit where credit is due, f##k the weak conference crap, they killed OU, Va Tech was a little closer, and ND. What National Champ hasn't had a close game? In 98 damn near every game UT played was close, winning the close ones is a better watermark than blowing out a weak or 2nd tier team. (In my opinion) Every dog has it's day, right now that dog is a Trojan. Don't hate...Congratulate
VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 20, 2005 4:51 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
William Rainey...brilliantly said! This guys team just got hammered by USC and he's smart enough to recognize good football. I agree 1000%, bandwaggoners and morons are what ruins good football chat. I had an idiot tell me the other day how shitty UT was, when I inquired who his team was he proudly claimed OU as his favorite. "Name 5 players on their squad" I challenged him. The stupid bastard didn't even know Adrian Peterson, I just told him to get out of my face. Of course then he wasn't really a fan of college ball, he was a Titans fan. Name 5 Titans was my reply. "Derrick Mason, Samari Rolle, and Steve McNair" were all he could get! Two of those guys are now with the Ravens! Morons who don't know their shit are what ruins good chat rooms and sites like this one. I definitely don't know everything, but damn at least know what you're talking about when you do. William, I was really surprised the Hogs didn't do well. Houston Nutt coached at Murray State about 45 minutes from me and he is an excellent coach. He must be struggling with recruiting, Texas and LSU, probably Auburn as well are making recruiting hell for him in our region. Think he wishes he would have gone to Lincoln now? Hell they are pitiful up there now. I hate it too because Nebraska was todays USC not too long ago.
AlphaDrive said:
posted on September 20, 2005 6:19 PM — 67.155.113.146 — link — abuse?
The PAC-10 is absolutely better than the SEC. Florida is your best team, and for godsakes FLA practically IS a PAC 10 team (all passing, no defense). USC is far and away the best team in the country. UCLA beat the everyloving crap out of Oklahoma. ASU dominated, fully dominated LSU... Stop talking about history. Who did what in what decade...? Who cares? The kids in the PAC 10 who are kicking the crap out of everyone now werent even born when the SEC had all your precious championships. Deal with reality as it is NOW. PAC TEN FOOTBALL BABY. BELIEVE IT.
Greg said:
posted on September 20, 2005 6:27 PM — 209.181.130.33 — link — abuse?
Cumberland Ave who is your team?????
USC has 11, count em 11 NATIONAL TITLES!
How many does your team have??
waiting...
What you SEC and whoever honks don't get is that the Pac 10 isn't weak, they play a different style. There are excellent athletes in the Pac 10 (just like in other conferences) thus there is a more open style of play (this is verfied by the fact that Pac 10 has the most players in the pros).
Before you get all worked up, keep in mind the SEC has some great teams but college football generally has cycles. USC was very bad in the 90's now they are simply one of the best teams ever! Also, look at last year. Everyone said OK was the best, all the analyst said not only will OK win but they will probably blow them out, but look what happened. Then AFTER the game everyone said Auburn should have been in the game but NO ONE said that before the Orange Bowl.
There are many good teams and conferences, it just so happens that USC is by far the best. It is not even close. The coaching far superior to anyone out there. Who could outcoach Carroll? Tuberville? Mack Brown? Bob Stoops? Tressell? Good grief, Tressell can't even get Ginn the damn ball. USC just makes is look easy, but its not, that is why no one else is doing.
THE SCOREBOARD DOESN'T LIE. Before your next post remember...SCOREBOARD!
3-pete here we come, then 4 pete...you get the idea!!
11 National Titles
6 Heisman Trophies (soon to be 7, 3 of the last 4)
Gerald said:
posted on September 20, 2005 8:10 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Greg and USC fans:
The PAC - 10 has more players in the NFL than anyone else? Not according to this link! 5 of the top 10 producers of NFL talent are in the SEC: Florida, Tennessee, UGA, Auburn, and LSU. The other 5 are FSU, Miami, Ohio State, Michigan, and Notre Dame. Meanwhile, no PAC - 10 school is on the list! Note that the source is the LA Times, USC's own hometown newspaper. And I don't want to hear about how the PAC - 10 is loaded with young stars that will fill the NFL soon. Like that isn't the case with the SEC?
I do not begrudge USC their success, but what I do hate is the hypocrisy. When you guys beat middle of the pack SEC schools, they are always "great wins against great opponents from a tough conference." But when you finish with the same record as an SEC school and want to be called the undisputed champs, all of a sudden the SEC is a bunch of overrated schools with weak schedules, slow athletes, and bad coaching!
Gerald said:
posted on September 20, 2005 8:42 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
One more thing Greg and PAC - 10 fans:
You all love to talk about "East Coast bias." Well excuse me, but precisely why are Oregon and UCLA ranked? Oregon was 5 - 6 last year (and not much better the year before), UCLA is coming off 7 - 6, 6 - 7, and 6 - 6 years. I will grant you that the teams are 6 - 0 this year, but come on. UCLA's opponents were San Diego State (0 - 3), Rice (0 - 2), and OU (1 - 2). Oregon's opponents were Houston (1 - 2), Fresno State, and I - AA Montana. Of the 6 games, only 1 was on the road (UCLA at San Diego).
Even better, Oregon needed 4th quarter comebacks against Fresno AND Houston. They gave up almost 400 yards to Houston and almost 500 to Fresno. AT HOME! Even against Montana, THEY HAD TO SETTLE FOR A SCHOOL RECORD SIX FIELD GOALS!
And yet those two schools are ranked. Now the media is claiming that "USC has a tough road game on the road against nationally ranked Oregon this weekend." And this Notre Dame thing. They beat 0 - 3 Pitt and a Michigan team lacking their best player, and all of a sudden they are national title contenders setting up this huge clash with USC? We were hearing about how Charlie Weis was a "genius" for beating a Michigan team without its best player when Ty Willingham beat Michigan 2 times out of 3!
Oh, and speaking of Michigan, oh how the media just LOVED to claim that USC beating #10 ranked Michigan in USC's OWN STADIUM was somehow the equivalent of LSU beating #2 ranked OU. How the media declared USC "the people's champ" despite LSU beating more ranked teams and higher ranked teams. I remember how after an OU defender ran down an LSU tailback from behind, the "objective" announcer screamed "THIS PROVES THAT LSU DOESN'T HAVE THE SPEED TO COMPETE WITH USC!" Never mind that it was a CORNERBACK with an ANGLE chasing down a 230 pound TAILBACK! But of course, Braylon Edwards getting WIDE OPEN behind USC's secondary (only to drop passes or have John Navarre not find him) went completely unmentioned.
Neither did they mention how LSU, who supposedly couldn't score, had a higher average margin of victory than USC. Nor did they mention that LSU's victory over Auburn was much more impressive than USC's ... LSU had a much easier time moving the ball on Auburn's defense than did USC ... they didn't need field position from turnovers and big special teams plays to put points on the board!
Don't get me wrong. I am not begrudging USC's sharing the title in 2003. Rather, I am debunking the foolish notion that LSU had no right to share the title, and the even more foolish notion that Auburn shouldn't have shared the title last year. Again, Auburn played more ranked teams ... and higher ranked teams ... than did USC. We were supposed to look at how Auburn barely beat LSU and how Virginia Tech and Tennessee came back in the second half. Sure, completely ignore the close calls that USC had against Virginia Tech, Stanford, Oregon State, and UCLA. The only difference is that Auburn had fewer close games, and theirs came against better teams ... New Year's Day bowl teams versus losers to Wyoming and Division II Cal - Davis!
And oh yes, since USC beat Auburn in 2003, of course they would have beaten them in 2004, right? Never mind that USC was 6 - 6 in Pete Carroll's first year. Never mind that just like how USC had their turnaround when Norm Chow came in to turn underachieving but talented Carson Palmer into a #1 draft pick, Al Borges came in and did the same for Jason Campbell and Auburn. The only difference is that Auburn was a much better program before Borges than was USC before Chow, and the fact that Auburn has more players in the pros than USC (see link above) proves it.
Now don't get me wrong. USC is overall a better program than Auburn or any other SEC school. They may even become the dominant college football program of the era. But LSU and Auburn were very worthy to share titles with mighty USC, and the SEC is - and shall be for the foreseeable future - a much better league than the PAC - 10, or anyone else for that matter
Gerald said:
posted on September 20, 2005 8:53 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Greg and PAC - 10 fans:
A final note: I get sick of people claiming that Pete Carroll was a mediocre NFL coach who became a great college coach. That foolishness is the reason why excellent college assistants and small college coaches are getting passed up for Dave Wannsted failures right now! Pete Carroll was actually a good NFL coach. Not only did he get the Jets to the playoffs before he was undermined by his awful ownership (the Jets didn't start winning until the ownership changed) and personnel, but he had some very good years with New England. As a matter of fact, had Curtis Martin not injured his shoulder that year, New England very well might have won the Super Bowl instead of Denver. And then Curtis Martin got injured the next year, and New England traded him and drafted another RB who suffered a career ending injiry after his rookie season. (Of course Curtis Martin went on to a Hall of Fame career after he got traded). And then Terry Glenn, New England's only receiver, quit on the team! Nah, Pete Carroll was a good NFL coach, and that is why he is an excellent college one.
And my parting shot is: how many top defenses have USC faced during their run, and how many points have they scored? Hmmm .... like I said earlier, they didn't exactly ring up the scoreboards against Auburn, and even in that Michigan "blowout" the offense had help from the sacks and turnovers that Navarre handed you!
And if USC fans are among the ones who claimed that "Nebraska and Oklahoma are overrated because they never play anybody" when those teams were winning titles during the 70s, 80s, and 90s (or the same about FSU in the ACC or Miami in the Big East) well then what does that say about your honesty?
JB said:
posted on September 20, 2005 9:03 PM — 204.69.4.81 — link — abuse?
Everyone give it up. USC has played as many tough teams as all the other elite schools, and the Pac-10 is just as competitive as the SEC, Big-10 and every other BCS league. LSU only got the BCS trophy in 2003 because the coaches were contractually obligated to vote for the winner of LSU-OU, even though the vast majority agreed that USC should've been champs. So why didn't the computers put USC in that game? Because the computer programmers decided the criteria. Last year the destroyed a team that was a truly great team in the championship game. I think OU could've beaten Auburn. So what, There's no doubt USC was the best last year? USC knew Arkansas was no good, but schedule was made years ago and they were probably hoping they were better. I also heard that Arkansas coaches were insulted to be 4 touchdown underdogs, SEC teams deserve better, right?
BIG TEN said:
posted on September 20, 2005 9:51 PM — 24.208.211.95 — link — abuse?
Are you kidding the pac 10 is as competitive as the big 10. If USC had to play teams even close to being as good as Ohio St., Michigan,Michigan St., Iowa, and Purdue they would get so banged up they would not make through the season with less than two losses. Instead they play teams like oregon and washington who are probably some of the worst teams in college football right now. I think everyone knows that the oklahoma team SC beat last year was terribly overrated, look at them now they are 0-3 and where is jason white? does anyone know? Had USC played Auburn they wouldnt of been able to compete with the quickness and experience of the best in the SEC.
William Rainey said:
posted on September 20, 2005 10:04 PM — 68.47.141.188 — link — abuse?
VOLPIMP I appreciate the comments and I'm glad we are on the same page. I wasn't surprised that my beloved razorbacks got whipped, not only is our defense in the middle of a transition into a different scheme, but we gave USC two weeks to prepare for us. We had no chance. And as for the fan you confronted I can top that. I was talking about life in general with a stranger, the topic quickly turned to football and I mentioned I love the razorbacks he then informed me he was a devoted USC fan. I asked him how he felt when the trojans first hired Pete Carroll and whether he knew then if Carroll was the man to lead his program, he then replied. Who? I said the coach. He said oh I don't know, I didn't start liking them until they won their first title.
John said:
posted on September 20, 2005 10:57 PM — 69.209.134.243 — link — abuse?
As a Notre Dame alumnus who narrowly chose ND over USC, it pains me to say it, but yes - USC is the best team of the last three years. They fully deserve the accolades they are getting.
The best teams struggle at times - as soon as they're near No. 1, every team they play spends more than the week prior to the game dreaming of upsetting the top team. (You won't find a coach who admits it, but duh!) USC never gets a game off, because everyone goes full out. They have a tremendous amount of depth, and there's only one injury that could seriously set them back.
Nonetheless, I think USC will drop a game this season. If they don't, I don't think the Rose Bowl will be close, because you know USC will get up for that. Their losing a game will require them to overlook a team. I'm thinking ND has a shot, simply because the USC players remember winning by 31 the past three years, and MIGHT cruise before that game. (and then if it snowed, and went to 20 below, hey, it COULD happen :-) ) In any case, a lot of teams, even if they're nowhere near the talent level of USC, will play to their utmost ability, and I expect one of those teams to get lucky. If not, that will only show just how dominant USC is, just how much better of a team they are than the teams on their schedule.
As for people jumping on the bandwagon of teams that are doing well - yeah it's annoying. But, ultimately, my view on that is simple - you only truly enjoy and understand the championships when you went through the earlier pain. The USC fans who went to games through the 1990s are precisely the ones who understand just how awesome it is for USC to be doing as it is. The ones who only became USC fans in the last few years have no ability to savor victory or put it in its proper perspective. They're the ones who will fall right off if USC drops a game, even though they'll still be the best team in college football.
John said:
posted on September 20, 2005 11:11 PM — 69.209.134.243 — link — abuse?
Out of curiosity, when did the 11 National Championships of USC occur?
This link shows Alabama to have 11, ND to have 12, and USC with 10. Yale leads with 19. Having trouble finding "modern era" data, but in any case, when were those eleven championships?
Greg said:
posted on September 20, 2005 11:30 PM — 209.181.130.35 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
You go on with your bad self. I don't konw of one SC fan that takes issue with LSU. Both LSU and USC got robbed of a chance at an undisputed title. I have much more issue with a team that was destroyed by 28 points in their title game. Do I believe we would have won, of course but arguing college football is one of the great pleasures in life...isn't it? Although as an SC fan I have to metion that we were #1 in BOTH polls at the end of the season. The ONLY reason we split the title was because of a contract...period.I stand corrected on the Pac 10 players in the NFL. Although for many many years the Pac 10 was well ahead of all the other conferences. Check back on this stat in 5 years...should be different.
Big Ten,You must be an luckeye fan. Don't get all worked up, you have a good conference and a good team. I simply do not believe that the Pac 10 is as bad as you say. I will state that the Pac 10 is not as top heavy right now but there is a tremendous amount of speed and talent and the Pac 10 beats each other up just like every other conference. I know I know, no matter what the record of Ohio State they are the best team in the nation. Four losses? Doesn't matter, they are still the best team in the nation. Some kind of conspiracy. Remember you guys chocked to Mack Brown, nuff said. Great game tho.
No matter who you root for, college football has had a great year so far. I love watching football from all the conferences. As an SC fan, of course I believe we are the best team in the land and believe that we would go undeafeted in ANY conference. If we lose, that is what college football great, anyone can beat anyone on any given day. I'll tell you this, as a fan that watched or went to EVERY single SC game during the dark years, this is sooo much fun. We are going for our third straight title, how cool is that.
Good luck if we meet on the field!!
Alexander said:
posted on September 21, 2005 12:00 AM — 67.127.6.105 — link — abuse?
I read all of these posts and here is my take:
A. I am an SC Alum
B. My older brother won a National Championship @ UCLA
C. My childhood best friend is a FSU Alum
Ready.......PAY CLOSE ATTN YA'LL**SC would have, and already has proven, that LSU and Auburn and anyone else would have been rolled during the past couple years. END OF STORY. Don't make yourself look foolish!!!!
1. ACC 2. SEC 3. PAC 10: Strongest ConferencesCumberland Ave said:
posted on September 21, 2005 12:02 AM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
Greg,
If one considers all the polls, USC actually has shared 16 NCAA Div. 1A national championships. I guess your total of 11 USC championships depends on which polls you are considering.
As for my team, the University of Tennessee has shared 7 national championships by the same criteria I have used to attribute 16 titles to USC.
I have repeatedly said USC is a great team. In fact, I admired the great Trojan teams in the 1960s and 1970s.
The focus of my discussion, however, is the misguided notion that USC is going for a three-peat. It irritates me to no end that all these announcers on ESPN and CBS and the other major networks just simply want to sweep under the rug the fact that LSU was undefeated and won the BCS championship in 2003-04 and that Auburn was undefeated in 2004-05 and did not get the same recognition from AP that USC got the previous year when LSU won the BCS.
Anyone with any football knowledge knows that comparative scores between common opponents is no sure-fire way to prognosticate the outcome of a USC-LSU matchup in 2003-04 or a USC-Auburn matchup in 2004-05.
USC could have just as easily lost to Virginia Tech as Auburn could have against the same Virginia Tech team in 2004-05. If you watched both games closely with all honesty, you would acknowledge that fact.
The other point I have hoped to drive home is that the competition in the SEC is consistently superior to the overall strength of teams in the Pac 10 year in and year out.
How many national titles does the Pac 10 hold outside of those attributed to USC?
How many national titles are spread out among a variety of teams in the SEC?
USC's current squad simply has three titles in the Morris poll from 2002-04, two AP titles in 2004 and 2005 and ONE BCS title in 2005. You and the media can cry three-peat all you want, but that is not the reality.
Gerald,
It's good to see a knowledgeable, well-researched and thoughtful post minus all the emotional histrionics of most people.
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 12:38 AM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
Big Ten is delusional. You sound like one of those Japanese WWII vets who are lost in the jungle and still think the war is on.
And what idiot would compare the Trojans to the Yankees? It is nowhere near the same thing. That's a bit like these jerks that claim USC could hang with the bottom-feeders in the NFC West. Come on, use your brain.
jin said:
posted on September 21, 2005 3:05 AM — 207.190.60.1 — link — abuse?
USC won outright or part of the national championship the last two years and are favored to win there third championship in a row.
switch USC with LSU Auburn Vandy Duke or even UC davis for all I care. It would have been the same story no matter who was in USC's position.
Think about it. If LSU won last year instead of the trojans then they would have been going for a 3-peat. Same with Auburn two years ago. The fact is that no matter what team it could have been, the media would be saying the exact same thing.Why do casual fans jump on the badwagon? It's because the media does it first.
JB said:
posted on September 21, 2005 5:34 AM — 68.5.134.191 — link — abuse?
BIG TEN wrote:
"Are you kidding the pac 10 is as competitive as the big 10. If USC had to play teams even close to being as good as Ohio St., Michigan,Michigan St., Iowa, and Purdue they would get so banged up they would not make through the season with less than two losses"2002 Orange Bowl: USC 38 - Iowa 17
2003 Rose Bowl: USC 28 - Michigan 14
2004 Orange Bowl: USC 55 - Oklahoma 19
(Oklahoma was overrated? They were being hyped as the best team ever - Maybe USC was underrated?)BIG TEN says:
"Instead they play teams like oregon and washington who are probably some of the worst teams in college football right now"2001 Holiday Bowl: Oregon 35 - Texas 30
2001 Rose Bowl: Washington 34 - Purdue 24
2001 Fiesta: Oregon State 41 - ND 9
2002 Sun: Wash St. 33 - Purdue 27
2002 Fiesta: Oregon 38 - Colorado 16
2003 Insight: California 52 - Virginia Tech 49
2003 Holiday: Wash St 28 - Texas 20
2004 Sun: Arizona St. 27 - Purdue 23I guess those lame Pac-10 teams can't beat anyone from those "elite" conferences...
And once again Cumberland, LSU only got the crystal football and the "new" version of the national championship because the coaches were contractually bound to vote for them as the winner. They didn't want to, and the media knows this. The much older and independent (read: no conflict of interest)AP poll went to USC. Technically LSU shares the national championship, but everyone outside of Louisiana and Auburn agrees it's all USC's.
ERIC said:
posted on September 21, 2005 10:11 AM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
College Football could be the #1 Sport in America - if an 8 team tournament was instituted. Have the 6 conference winners plus 2 at-large teams compete for a national championship ON THE FIELD. Use the 7 biggest bowl games to decide the winners in the tourney...and let the rest of the bowls be used as a reward for teams that go 7-4 (or better.)
USC can't win a 3-peat
because LSU won the BCS in 2003!Auburn should've won in 2004 - but the media didn't want AU to whip USC (they chose a weak OU team instead.)
The fact that LSU was snubbed in 04 and USC was snubbed in 03 should be reason enough to institute the NCAA D-1 tourney!
Until then, you really don't know which team is the best!!!
TOny Tiger said:
posted on September 21, 2005 10:21 AM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
LSU won the BCS in 2003
Auburn was the undefeated champ of 2004
Can USC finally win something in 2005?
The Sportswriters, Coaches and Computer polls need to be eliminated from the college football landscape. A post-season tournament is sorely needed. In fact, which other collegiate sport does not have a tournament at years end?
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 10:58 AM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
"Auburn should've won in 2004 - but the media didn't want AU to whip USC (they chose a weak OU team instead.)"
Conspiracy theorists- rejoice!
My word, if you people's lives weren't so singularly wrapped up in college football and little else, you'd have the ability to look at things in perspective. Only when that happens will you be able to see that this BS you LSU 2003 drum bangers keep playing simply doesn't carry a tune. The media didn't want to see USC lose? Do yourself a favor, buy a tape recorder and record yourself spouting the drivel you spout so well for 24 hours. Then send it to half a dozen state psychologists (outside of SEC territory) and wait for the men in little white coats to arrive. It'll only hurt for a second.
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 11:08 AM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
"Auburn was the undefeated champ of 2004"
If you are going to call LSU the 2003 champion based only on the BCS, then you must do the same for USC in 2004. USC got left out in 2003, and Auburn got left out in 2004. It sucks - accept it and move on. Do you guys know how moronic you sound sometimes?
As has always been the case in this absurd debate, you Auburn/LSU/SEC apologists adjust the rules in whichever way you can to benefit yourselves. It works so well for you to discount SC's championship in 2003 due to the fact that they were at the short end of a contactual obligation, yet you have no problem discounting SC's championship in 2004 even though they won based on your own idiotic criteria. I'm a Gator fan, and you guys embarrass the hell out of me. It's a sad fact that if it weren't for this idiotic subject, you guys would have little else to discuss.
Randy said:
posted on September 21, 2005 11:19 AM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
USC TROJANS:
#2 Largest Market in America
No NFL team to compete with in LA marketSouthern Cal and it's fans are the biggest joke in the country! They say they're #1 - yet nobody wants to actually show up and watch this team play! Until Southern Cal and it's miniscule fan base actually "sells out" a home game, the real SC still plays in Columbia, SC. The Trojan nation (all 4 of them) can not rationally justify why Southern Cal fans come dressed as empty seats - every home game.
Southern Cal may have been something good back in the good ole days...but nobody wanted to see the Old Trojans then & nobody apparently wants to see those Trojans now either!Get over it Trojans - your only a paper champ that the media has created over the past 2 yrs. LSU was clearly better than USC in 03...when LSU won the REAL national title. Auburn was clearly better than USC on 2004 - yet Petey Carroll and his backroom shenanigans allowed USC to play the weak OU...instead of the undefeated AU Tigers. In reality, Karlos Dansby, Cadillac Williams, Ronnie Brown and Jason Campbell are clearly better than anyone on Southern Cals 04 team. The Tigers would've "mopped up" the Trojans and exposed that team for what it really was!
Southern Cal "Paper Champs"
ThomasT said:
posted on September 21, 2005 11:40 AM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
SC FAN really shows the lack of football knowledge shared by all Trojan fans:
"The Pac-10 is the best conference in America as far as talent goes. Just look at the number of Pac-10 players that play on Sundays."
To test SCFan's hypothesis, I checked the roster of my favorite team - The Buffalo Bills. Maybe that would shed some light on SCFan's theory of PAC-10 NFL PLAYER DOMINATION.
Here's the Bills players from the PAC-10:
Tim EUHUS - Oregon
Rian LINDELL - Wash St
Lawyer MILLOY - Wash.
Ryan NEUFELD - UCLA
Now here's the Bills palyers from the SEC:
Rashad Baker - UT
Justin Geisinger - Vandy
Jabari Greer - UT
Mario Haggan - Miss St
Shane Matthews - Fla
Eric Moulds - Miss St
Jason Peters - Ark
Josh Reed - LSU
Constantin Ritzmann - UT
Shaud Williams - Ala
Trey Teague - UT
Takeo Spikes - Aub
George Wilson - ArkSCFan, I can't help but notice that there are only 4 Pac-10 players on the Bills. There are over a dozen SEC players on the Bills. Heck, there's 4 ex-Volunteers...matching the total number from the whole Pac-10 conference!!!
SCFan, your typical Trojan comments are not passing my "smell test."
Just stick to playing other weak Pac-10 teams and leave the NFL talk to the Pros.
Go Bills!
Scrub said:
posted on September 21, 2005 11:47 AM — 165.251.12.36 — link — abuse?
Say what you want about LSU/USC, but the comments about Auburn beating USC are funny!
Auburn 17, USC 24 (Sep 2, 2002 quotes)
"They started putting nine in the box, and when they do that, you've got to throw it," Auburn coach Tommy Tuberville said. "We couldn't throw it and catch it well enough. We had two drops that hurt us."
"I can't say what happened in the second half. It just seemed like we fell apart," Carnell Williams said.
Auburn 0, USC 23 (Aug 30, 2003 quotes)"They beat us in the trenches, which is what you have to do to win," Auburn running back Carnell Williams said.
"A good defensive line can dominate a football game," Jason Campbell said. "That is exactly what happened tonight. They did it in the second half to us last year, and did it the whole time tonight."
Troy Champs said:
posted on September 21, 2005 12:02 PM — 204.44.186.129 — link — abuse?
Schedules are determined 3-10 years a head of time, USC would like to have known how great they were going to be so they could have planned a harder schedule.
Auburn- SC whooped em 2 years in a row, not just scraped by. Auburn beat OU and then we showed the country how to whoop OU.
Be happy, SC will go drop losses (plural) starting next year. The best talent's getting tired of competing so hard with other top talent, and the Offense is graduating. Everyone likes to drag down a winner....Ignorance is bliss in NY said:
posted on September 21, 2005 12:07 PM — 204.44.186.129 — link — abuse?
TomT's ignorance is so obvious...
Pick your team? Who cares, use the numbers of the whole NFL, just as the intitial writer stated. SC does have the most historically...Iv'e met Bills fans, and consider them generally intellgent, hope they are not aware of you. Please don't go swimming in the gene pool, you'll just dirty it up....
Do you have your mommy's permission to use the computer?
posted on September 21, 2005 12:13 PM — 72.146.27.200 — link — abuse?
Wow!!
"the real SC still plays in Columbia, SC"
That is amazing!! I agree to a certain degree that the BSC is stupid and I personally think that college football should come up with some form of playoffs. Although, I'm sure that we could find a way to complain about that too... but come on... "the real SC" ? Look, I don't know if the lack of sense started in your tariler park in Auburn or if it just spread there. Either way, it has messed up your head. Did you see what Bama did to "the real SC" last Saturday? They do have a great coach but he isn't going to see that SEC Championship this year or next...
Randy-Yep said:
posted on September 21, 2005 12:13 PM — 204.44.186.129 — link — abuse?
Gerald is well spoken, his points are correct.
Pac-10 does not have the talent as the SEC does, or ACC for that matter. There are simply more football colleges in those regions of the country.
Look at Academic figures between the SEC and the Pac-10 and it will explain a lot.Randy is ignorant - yea, we DO have the biggest market but we have lives here, there is so much culture and things to pursue, SEC towns, what the hell else you going to do? We have lives, and that just pisses you off. We love NCAA footbal, but, in spite of it, we have other lives.
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 12:33 PM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
ThomasT makes an idiotic argument. First, whenever you do something like what you did, back it up with empirical evidence. I picked 4 random teams and did a 2005 roster check (Baltimore, New England, Chicago and Green Bay). 3 of those 4 had larger player representation from the Pac-10 vs SEC, and New England shows SEC and Pac-10 representation to be equal (I did a quick count, so forgive me if I'm off by one here or there). Of course, there will be cases where it's more in favor of one or the other, and I'm certainly not about to say that the SEC is "better" than the Pac-10 or vice versa because of NFL representation (who can really tell?), but this is a non-starter. That's as dumb as saying the Pac-10 is the strongest conference just because USC is the best team in America right now. I wish someone could present a well-thought argument here instead of just blind passion.
Hog Fan said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:00 PM — 68.47.141.188 — link — abuse?
You can't honestly expect us to believe that B.S., I just don't buy that people in L.A. don't go to USC games because they would rather go to the art gallery or opera. USC doesn't sellout because people just don't care about football, believe me if they did care the NFL would have a team in there quick. Now granted one of the factors is that L.A. sports fans also have the Dodgers, Lakers, Clippers, and Angels among others to choose from but they choose to follow a different sport not not go to the theater. Besides I've been to L.A., and if you took half the people that are out shopping and put them in the stadium they'd have overflow. So what, you don't think we have malls down here. Devoted fans go to games no matter what.
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:03 PM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
While we're on the subject of blind passion vs informed debate, how about this nugget:
"Oh, and speaking of Michigan, oh how the media just LOVED to claim that USC beating #10 ranked Michigan in USC's OWN STADIUM was somehow the equivalent of LSU beating #2 ranked OU. How the media declared USC "the people's champ" despite LSU beating more ranked teams and higher ranked teams."
First, and I'm not one to nit-pick, but the game was NOT played on USC's own field. USC plays in the LA Memorial Coliseum. The Rose Bowl is played in, um, the Rose Bowl. The Coliseum is in Los Angeles, the Rose Bowl is in Pasadena. They are 20 miles apart. UCLA plays their home games in the Rose Bowl. Unless USC is actually playing in the January Rose Bowl game, they only play in the Rose Bowl once every two years, when they play UCLA, and everyone knows that, by design, attendance at that game is split 50/50 between USC and UCLA.
Furthermore, anyone who was actually at the Rose Bowl in 2004 (for the 2003 season) knows that there were more Michigan fans in attendance than USC fans (yes - they are fairweather fans out here - but I've been to many a game in the late 80's Swamp that weren't sellouts either). The point is that there was, decidedly, NO home field advantage for USC in that particular Rose Bowl game.
Cumberland Ave said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:08 PM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
It's kind of pathetic that USC fans continue to refer to the Trojans's wins over Auburn teams that went 8-4 and 7-5. Each of the years that USC beat Auburn, at least three or four SEC teams beat Auburn.
LSU and USC each have ONE BCS championship in the past five years.
I don't hear anyone from USC saying the coaches were "obligated" to vote for USC because the Trojans beat an overrated Oklahoma team for the BCS without having to play undefeated Auburn.
The NFL scouts obviously thought well of Auburn in selecting Cadillac Williams, Ronnie Brown, etc. in the first round of the NFL Draft.
The coaches were no more "obligated" to pick LSU in 2003-04 than they were to pick USC in 2004-05.
USC is NOT going for a three-peat!
Scrub said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:28 PM — 165.251.12.36 — link — abuse?
Cumberland, you of all people are the one who likes to pull up win statistics from decades ago for the SEC (I can pick out dozens of posts from you counting games more than 2 years ago). You also say USC can't play defense, yet the direct quotes from the Auburn players say otherwise. The USC-Auburn games were RECENT and had pretty much the same personnel on both sides (Leinart, Williams, Campbell).
William Rainey said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:32 PM — 68.47.141.188 — link — abuse?
Hey guys quick question, As a hog fan I'm sitting here in Little Rock, Arkansas and I'm hearing all these people calling in to the local sports shows and when they aren't demanding for the coaches to be fired after two of the most embarrissing loss I've ever seen, they are either bashing USC and Pete Carroll for throwing the ball late in the game and running up the score, or saying it's not their fault they had the scrubs in and we should have stopped them. Just for the record most feel we should have stopped them and I agree, but some of the older fans are upset and are calling USC classless. What do you guys think?
Flaussen,
Since you took offense to my comparing USC with the Yankees I feel I should explain myself just in case no one else got it either. Two Things:#1: They are similiar to the Yanks because just about every non-yankee fan wishes their favorite team could have the players or at least the payroll the Yankees have(maybe not this year).
#2: If a losing team(such as the Devil Rays) somehow beats the Yankees in the season series its the highlight of their season. Much like if a team that ends up 5-6 somehow beats USC it will be the highlight of their season.
Get it now?
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:46 PM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
"Randy is ignorant - yea, we DO have the biggest market but we have lives here, there is so much culture and things to pursue, SEC towns, what the hell else you going to do? We have lives, and that just pisses you off. We love NCAA footbal, but, in spite of it, we have other lives."
Come on, I mostly agree with you, but one of the best years of my life was the year I spent at Mississippi doing graduate work. Give Oxford credit - it's a jewel. And Athens is great as well, but it's no Oxford, IMO.
And anyone who doesn't give credence to the notion that an abundance of diversions, be they sport or otherwise, has anything to do with attendance at individual college football games in SoCal is just ignorant. It's narrow views like that make me boil. Average attendance at all college football events combined in Southern California is routinely more than any other area in the country on a weekly basis (assuming all teams are home). In addition to more things to do in general, there are also 3 colleges I can think of that field football teams in southern California. Just USC and UCLA had nearly 150,000 people last week, and even in down years routinely pull around 100k. That's pretty good considering the irrefutible fact that there is so much else to do here. Take the college football out of SoCal and life goes on. Take the college football out any of half-a-dozen SEC environs and that environ's identity goes with it.
Leonard said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:48 PM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
Randy-Yep's comments are classic SouCal dribble - let's do a double take on his lunicy:
Exhibit A:
"Pac-10 does not have the talent as the SEC does, or ACC for that matter. There are simply more football colleges in those regions of the country."First of all, it's the high schools that provide the talent for the Pac-10. There are more high schoolers in California alone than Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky & Arkansas combined! Now, consider that those 7 southern states have no less than 20 Division 1-A football programs competing for that smaller talent pool (not to mention dozens of historically black colleges and universities within the region.) The Pac-10 is weaker in football because they do not have the same level of commitment. Look at the numbers America, the top SEC and ACC teams can go to California, Washington or Arizona and hand-pick the best players for their teams. The college football fans at places like UT, Georgia, GaTech, Alabama, LSU & Auburn is much more passionate than any Pac-10 fan! The total football experience at a ballgame in Baton Rouge or Knoxville or Athens is much more enjoyable and anything the Pac-10 can conjure up. Those Southern Cal Trojans wouldn't even know what a "sell-out crowd" even looks like!
Exhibit B:
"yea, we DO have the biggest market but we have lives here, there is so much culture and things to pursue, SEC towns, what the hell else you going to do? We have lives, and that just pisses you off."Do you think the SEC is just about football? America's best track teams are from the SEC. The best women's b'ball teams are in the SEC. This year's College Baseball World Series had more SEC teams than any other conference.
Randy-Yep thinks that Hollywood has cornered the market on culture...I think not! It's true, many Angelinos are pretentious jerks. They think they have the best of everything.
We see how your Southern Cal Trojans like OJ get away with murder - all the time. We see how your cops beat Rodney King - without being punished. We see how your inner-city thugs beat up Reginald Denny...and never got punished for it. We saw your neighbor taking his WWII tank for a drive - then being killed by the LAPD (without a trial mind you.) We also see your cops using their famous "pit maneuver" to sideswip cars - and kill many innocent civilians too. Who could forget your famous BankofAmerica shootout - where the badguys we're finished off by the cops (and then left to die for over an hour while the police played judge, jury and executioner.)
One man's idea of culture is another man's idea of hell-on-earth.
Enjoy LA and where your FLACKJACKET you moron!
One day you too will see the light and move to an SEC town near you!!!
Cumberland Ave said:
posted on September 21, 2005 1:50 PM — 24.215.202.246 — link — abuse?
For an accurate account of SEC and Pac 10 players in the NFL drafts from 1980 to present, visit www.nfl.com/draft
USC won the BCS championship in 2004-05 season. Auburn went undefeated that same season. In round one of the 2005 NFL draft, NFL teams selected FOUR players from Auburn and TWO players from USC. Ten SEC players and Three Pac 10 players were selected in the first round. Do you still want to argue that undefeated Auburn was not a worthy opponent for USC?
LSU won the BCS championship in the 2003-04 season. USC won the #1 ranking at season's end in AP.
2004 NFL draft Round One
USC 1 player LSU 1 player
SEC 6 players Pac 10 3 players
2004 NFL draft Round Two
LSU 2 players
USC 2 players
I might add that one former Auburn running back who tranferred to Southern Illinois was drafted by the New York Giants and saw good playing time in the Giants' win over the New Orleans Saints.
Still want to argue that LSU did not have the players to beat USC in 2003-04?
Four polls out of 15 declared USC "1 in 2003. The BCS and the remaining 10 polls declared LSU the national champion in 2003.
LSU is the ONLY BCS champion NOT to win a "1 ranking in BOTH the AP and BCS.
Media hype helped USC in 2003!
Southern California has the advantage of being in Los Angeles, the third largest media market in the U.S. By contrast, undefeated Auburn in 2004 enjoyed no such media hype because it is NOT in a large media market. Pure and simple.
Prove your superiority on the field USC Trojans.
BCS champs are:
1998 UT
1999 Fla. St.
2000 Okla.
2001 Miami
2002 Ohio St.
2003 LSU
2004 SoCalI think those Miami teams of 2001 and 2002 compare favorably with the USC teams of 2003 and 2004. Let's not forget that Miami came very close to repeating as national champs in 2001 and 2002 and Ohio State in 2002 was a much better team than Oklahoma in 2004.
USC will face even weaker competition this year because the SEC and Big Ten are in down years.
No dynasty for the current USC Trojans!
TonyT said:
posted on September 21, 2005 2:02 PM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
This post slamming RANDY-YEP says it all! Bravo to the writer & I dare any SC fan to reply
________________________________________________
RANDY-YEP's comments are classic SouCal dribble - let's do a double take on his lunicy:Exhibit A:
"Pac-10 does not have the talent as the SEC does, or ACC for that matter. There are simply more football colleges in those regions of the country."First of all, it's the high schools that provide the talent for the Pac-10. There are more high schoolers in California alone than Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky & Arkansas combined! Now, consider that those 7 southern states have no less than 20 Division 1-A football programs competing for that smaller talent pool (not to mention dozens of historically black colleges and universities within the region.) The Pac-10 is weaker in football because they do not have the same level of commitment. Look at the numbers America, the top SEC and ACC teams can go to California, Washington or Arizona and hand-pick the best players for their teams. The college football fans at places like UT, Georgia, GaTech, Alabama, LSU & Auburn is much more passionate than any Pac-10 fan! The total football experience at a ballgame in Baton Rouge or Knoxville or Athens is much more enjoyable and anything the Pac-10 can conjure up. Those Southern Cal Trojans wouldn't even know what a "sell-out crowd" even looks like!
Exhibit B:
"yea, we DO have the biggest market but we have lives here, there is so much culture and things to pursue, SEC towns, what the hell else you going to do? We have lives, and that just pisses you off."Do you think the SEC is just about football RANDY-YEP? America's best track teams are from the SEC. The best women's b'ball teams are in the SEC. This year's College Baseball World Series had more SEC teams than any other conference.
The truth is, many Angelinos are pretentious jerks. They think they have the best of everything.
The truth of the matter is:
We see how your Southern Cal Trojans like OJ get away with murder - all the time. We see how your cops beat Rodney King - without being punished. We see how your inner-city thugs beat up Reginald Denny...and never got punished for it. We saw your neighbor taking his WWII tank for a drive - then being killed by the LAPD (without a trial mind you.) We also see your cops using their famous "pit maneuver" to sideswip cars - and kill many innocent civilians too. Who could forget your famous BankofAmerica shootout - where the badguys we're finished off by the cops (and then left to die for over an hour while the police played judge, jury and executioner.)
One man's idea of culture is another man's idea of hell-on-earth.
Enjoy LA and wear your FLACKJACKET!
One day you too will see the light and move to an SEC town near you - just like your local football talent did!!!
Emo said:
posted on September 21, 2005 2:02 PM — 64.165.33.2 — link — abuse?
Tony Tiger's comments show what a bitter old fart he is. Trojans are 2 time champs, live with it, and for god sake, shut up. As far as scheduling, Jeremy M, at least Arkansas was D1. You need to look no further than the SEC "powers" to find early season non-conf juggernaut opponents such as the Citadel, Louisiana Monroe, Tulane et al. The only place the Trojans lose is in your silly little smack sessions on blogs, they win on the field and win big, and the only reason you talk trash is because you know deep down their better than (insert your favorite SEC team or any team for that matter) and you're thanking your lucky stars you dont have to face them...you'd be their next victim upon whom they would hang their next 50 points.
Casey said:
posted on September 21, 2005 2:16 PM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
College Football could be the #1 Sport in America - if an 8 team tournament was instituted. Have the 6 conference winners plus 2 at-large teams compete for a national championship ON THE FIELD. Use the 7 biggest bowl games to decide the winners in the tourney...and let the rest of the bowls be used as a reward for teams that go 7-4 (or better.)
----------------------------------------------Eric's earlier post is right on! Until then, I vote that the ACC and SEC should sign an agreement to have their conference champions play each other in the SuperBowl of the South. The best football in America is played in the South and many college football fans don't care about the weaker conferences like the Pac10, Big10, or Big12. Let those others "duke it out" by drawing straws or the Harris Poll or whatever. Football is too important in the south!
College Football deserves an on-field champ...instead of crowning a paper tiger like last years USC team.
Auburn got hosed!!!
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 2:24 PM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
If you are going to throw out an AP championship from 2003 because it's supposedly invalid or "mythical", then throw away ALL AP championships from the poll's inception. I'll take the history of the AP over the history of the BCS any day. Funny how you never hear anyone from the SC side claim that LSU shouldn't share. Also funny that the NCAA's own website refers to both LSU and USC as national champs in 2003. Every credible organization refers to SC and LSU as co-champs. You don't hear anyone complaining about 1997, so why the double standard? They ARE going for a third championship.
William Rainey - Perhaps I jumped the gun in my assumption that you were referring to the Yankee's acquisition of players by paying whatever it takes to get them ("buying championships"), which is precisely why they are as hated as they are these days, IMO. USC got their players the same way everyone else did (read:fair and square), which is why I took exception to your comment.
Five opposing coaches this year (two from Hawaii, two from Arkansas, and one already from Oregon) have proclaimed USC as the best team they have ever or will ever face, not just this year - ever. Last I checked, Arkansas plays in the SEC, so why are their statements seen as invalid?
"They are the best I've seen, best I've ever coached against. On film it's one thing ... but ... uh ... it's another thing to see them in person." I assume by "ever", Nutt's including Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, Texas, and yes, LSU. And I also assume he's not conveniently ignoring the entire 2004 schedule, either. A comment made from personal experience, not uninformed and misguided passion.
alphaDrive said:
posted on September 21, 2005 2:32 PM — 67.155.113.146 — link — abuse?
This comment proves the point that (many) SEC and ACC fans are simply delusional good ol boys who live in their own little football fantasy world:
"I vote that the ACC and SEC should sign an agreement to have their conference champions play each other in the SuperBowl of the South. The best football in America is played in the South and many college football fans don't care about the weaker conferences like the Pac10, Big10, or Big12. Let those others "duke it out" by drawing straws or the Harris Poll or whatever. Football is too important in the south!"
----------------------------------------------------
God forbid southern teams should face off against any other region in the country. Might ruin the fantasy of them being the best...
Hog Fan said:
posted on September 21, 2005 2:36 PM — 68.47.141.188 — link — abuse?
Casey says:
I vote that the ACC and SEC should sign an agreement to have their conference champions play each other in the SuperBowl of the South.I agree, that would be a sweet deal but we can't just ignore the other teams in the rest of the country. Oklahoma will rebound eventually and Texas will take their place for now. USC, whether we like it, or not is becoming such a force that they will have a say in the national championship picture for a long long time and the Big Ten is a solid conference with at least one contender every year. So while I'm with you 110% for the "SuperBowl of the South", we must make sure we get the two best teams on the field for the championship and not just the best teams from the top two conferences.
FLaussen said:
posted on September 21, 2005 2:47 PM — 24.205.90.247 — link — abuse?
"Enjoy LA and wear your FLACKJACKET!"
Another misguided comment from someone who has never been to LA and chooses to blindly spew ignorance rather than take the time to inform themselves. The South has the highest murder rates in the country, year in, year out. Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia all have higher murder rates than California. By city, the "safe" south had 13 cities in the top 20 murder rates in 2003. Los Angeles was 19th in 2003. New Orleans was 1st, followed by such Southern safe havens as Pine Bluff, Memphis, Jackson, Savannah, Shreveport and Birmingham. Who really needs the flack jacket?
But what does that have to do with football?
posted on September 21, 2005 2:49 PM — 168.166.54.11 — link — abuse?
"But what does that have to do with football?"
Good question...
Constantin said:
posted on September 21, 2005 3:06 PM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
agree, that would be a sweet deal but we can't just ignore the other teams in the rest of the country.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++HogFan your missing the point! Auburn did get ignored by by the rest of the country. We in the south all saw how Jason Campbell blossomed into the #1 QB in America during 2004 (just as David Greene "laid an egg" in 2004 - after playing so good in 2002 and 2003.) We in the south all saw how Cadillac Williams and Ronnie Brown developed into College Football's best RB's during 2004. We in the south all saw how Auburn's defense (led by Karlos Dansby) had developed into the #1 defense in America.
We'll all be sitting here 2-3 years from now talking about Cadillac, Ronnie, Jason and Karlos and the great NFL Careers they are having.
Yet, the current powerbrokers of the NCAA will try and convince you that Leinart was better than Campbell and Reggie Bush was better than Cadillac or Ronnie. It's all nonsense - SC got the free pass to play OU...
MOST OVERRATED THINGS IN COLLEGE FOOTBALL:
1. USC - the empty stands on home games tell me everything I need to know about Trojan football. All-hype no substance!
2. N Dame - come on people. NBC needs you to think ND is great. The boys at NBC think you'd better watch those Irish. I think the Irish need to harken back to the rubber helmet days of football - to remember when they were good.
3. Harris Poll - sure, we need another poll telling us who the best 2 teams in america are. The whole idea of polls deciding things, instead of a tournament is crazy. If it's good enough for 1-AA and every other sport in america, it's good enough for D-1 Football.
William Rainey said:
posted on September 21, 2005 3:26 PM — 68.47.141.188 — link — abuse?
Hey Emo! Arkansas might be a D1 team but we sure didn't play like it last Saturday!
No argument that the SEC plays some weak teams but everyone does and if you want I could provide you with some schedules were SEC teams played very tough games within the past two years.
ILoveLA said:
posted on September 21, 2005 3:30 PM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
FLaussen has lost his mind!
Another misguided comment from someone who has never been to LA and chooses to blindly spew ignorance rather than take the time to inform themselves.
______________________________________________This is the mindless dribble those WestCoasters are capable of. I spent years in California during my Marine Corps days - protecting our country (including idiots like FLaussen.)
LA is the armpit of America. They have the horrible traffic jams, bad gang problems, ruthless crooked cops, etc...
TV camera crews "cut in" on TV shows daily - just so Angelinos can watch the daily car chases between the cops and robbers. The only culture in LA, is the "crime culture!" LA's crime culture should be an embarrasment to the people of LA.
LA gave us:
1. Rodney King - great police work guys
2. Reginald Denny - the LA homies are nice folk
3. OJ - Any other SC alums doing great things?
4. Shootout at the B of A - your suburbs are fun
5. The Watts riots - now thats pride in your town
6. The Bloods - America thanks you for that gift
7. The Crips - Oh Great, another LA successReally, who can blame your football talent for leaving THE GREAT CITY in search of a life. The only life in LA is "THUG-life"
John Q Public said:
posted on September 21, 2005 3:37 PM — 68.59.183.110 — link — abuse?
Don't look now FLaussen but the LAPD is performing "pit maneuvers" 2 blocks north of your current location. Better hope your wife and kids are not walking down the sidewalk - are they could be next family killed by the LAPD. With cops like the LAPD, who needs crooks?
Best cops in america:
1. New Orleans - the luting cops caught on film during Katrina are cla
Jeremy M said:
posted on September 19, 2005 4:00 PM — 192.138.70.245 — link — abuse?Play some real teams USC? Who did this scheduling? This is a joke.