January 25, 2006
USC Trojans 2006 Football Schedule
09/02/06 Arkansas Fayetteville, Ark.
09/16/06 Nebraska L.A. Coliseum
09/23/06 Arizona Tucson, Ariz.
09/30/06 Washington State Pullman, Wash.
10/07/06 Washington L.A. Coliseum
10/14/06 Arizona State L.A. Coliseum
10/28/06 Oregon State Corvallis, Ore.
11/04/06 Stanford Palo Alto, Calif.
11/11/06 Oregon L.A. Coliseum
11/18/06 California L.A. Coliseum
11/25/06 Notre Dame L.A. Coliseum
12/02/06 UCLA Pasadena, Calif.
Comments:
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 26, 2006 3:44 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
I'm more concerned with Arizona at Tucson. They've definately upgraded everywhere - and the new QB could be trouble. Notre Dame will be a battle also. Arizona State and Cal (provided Longshore is the QB) might have a chance. I give no chance to either Oregon or UCLA. They were just blown out to hard last year. I don't think that Nebraska is ready for anything like this either. So, 10-2 is the worst case scenario and it might just be 12-0 again. I like the idea that the Irish lost both the TE and their other premier receiver. I know they have another pass catcher comin' - but, he is not as large as the other guy was. Nevertheless, Quinn and Smarge will be tough to stop.
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 26, 2006 6:53 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Yeh, we almost lost that "foggy" debacle at Oregon State. SoCal boyz don't like that cold and rainy weather. I know that I got out of Washington as soon as I could! Funny thing is: I don't think those Oregon and Washington players like that crap either - they don't seem to play very well in it either. What's the point? Do you think the Pac-10 hierarchy might favor trying to keep a "high profile team" that way? Do you think they might make a ton of money off of those Big Time BCS bowls? Well, if they were, then they would probably do some things to soften the path for their "favored" programs - so that they can make more money. Try not to blame it all on the USC players: it's not their greed that causes any kind of favoritism. And, USC is not the only program receiving those kind of perks. Several other schools get the "yellow brick road" treatment in order for certain conferences to make more money. Hell, if the Pac-10 didn't help - then no Pac-10 team would ever get to a BCS game no matter how good they were. You have to be undefeated in the Pac-10, normally, to get a BCS invite. USC was an exception in 2003. When someone else steps up to the table - they'll get the same bennies that any other Champion gets.
Tommie Trojan
Trouty said:
posted on January 26, 2006 7:41 PM — 71.80.205.13 — link — abuse?
Hey USC will be in the fiesta bowl next year too much talent everywhere. Sure there losing Bush Lineart and White. But give me a break. Look whos backing those guys up. They will have two years worth of number 1 recruiting classes along with this years steller class. Face the facts the D will be better next year not worse. In fact they might be dominating. Speed at every position and hard hiting line backer dallas sartz gets another year of Eligability. They will role over there scedule and everybody will see the dynasty train still is chuging along. 3 championships in 4 years aint to shabby and thats my prediction for this time next year.
Booty will be the next great USc QB. Hershal Dennis and a slew of running backs will keep the oFence rolling along with dominating wideouts everywhere. The O line will be okay hopefully. It might be the weakest part of the team next year. The D line will be awsome with Lo Jack and Shwiger and Ellis the linebackers will be so deep it will be hard to keep track of the names. And the Secondary will have exciting new comers like Mozique and Will Thomas and Cary Harris along with Pinkard should be one of the tops in the pac 10. One more thing to add to this. They will be hungry to prove to the nation this isnt a short term thing they have brewing at SC. They will prove that BUSh and Loinhart were not the only thing that kept the machine running. They have so much talent at USC they will continue to dominate for a little while longer.The Mayor said:
posted on January 26, 2006 8:55 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
K Hat,
That last USC game in the great Northwest states was 11/6/04 against the Oregon State Beavers. A very close game played in miserable foggy conditions.
USC's warm weather November travel schedule was discussed in another blog by a Notre Dame fan and myself. I suspect a conspiracy by the men of Troy.
Only 289 more days until the Ducks beat USC in LA...looking forward to it.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 27, 2006 6:47 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Well, Trojan fans! Looks like that just about wrapped up another National Championship run. With the commitment of RB Stafon Johnson (Dorsey High, LA) - we have just landed the next Bo Jackson/Herschel Walker type clone. At 5'11 200 and 4.4 speed - he's just gonna be one of the next Heisman winner's here at SC.
With Johnson, RC Gable and Emmanuel Moody plus Fullback Stanley Havili all on board - I think the issue of "how are we gonna pound the rock?" - as pretty much been addressed. Man, do I feel sorry for all you fans of other teams. Looks like we'll end up leading the nation in recruiting again. If we land the BIG OT and DT that we're after - it's really gonna be all over before it even starts.Tommie Trojan
Duckman said:
posted on January 28, 2006 7:55 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Talk all you want but you just don’t replace talent like you had. They may be competitive next year but they will not be dominant. Remember that the local media will tell everyone how good USC will be next year to sell tickets. Don’t feel bad. Every one dose it. USC is one big question mark. Even if the new guys perform well I don’t think it will be good enough to beat the tough teams that are on that schedule next year. Cross your fingers and rub your lucky rabbits foot but in the end it will do you no good. Next year will be a test of loyalty. It will be a year that the ban Wagoner’s leave and the diehards stick around. I would put USC between 7-4 and 5-6 next year. Sorry Tommie!! I promise I wont gloat next year.
P.S. GO DUCKS!!!
Diggs the Mountie said:
posted on January 29, 2006 12:08 AM — 68.80.255.161 — link — abuse?
Tommie T: I don't care who USC got this year at RB, there will never ever be another Bo Jackson no matter how much u want this guy to be him. I have to agree with Duckman about your reg season record to 7-4, or maybe just possibly 8-3. Oh yeah I'm pretty sure the Gators are leading the Nation in recruiting right now,and probably will continue to do so for the remainder of the year. LET'S GOOOOOOO MOUNTAINEERS!!!!!!!!
Dan said:
posted on January 30, 2006 1:56 AM — 66.71.94.242 — link — abuse?
Tommie,
I like your NC prediction. I believe you made the same one this year, but that was before you found out that Vince Young was better than your whole defense. Maybe you should rethink that "no worse than 10-2" prediction; it's the uncertainty that makes college football great. In fact, the only certainty is that fans who spout about how great their team is (USC fans this year who insisted that there was "NO WAY" they'd lose to Texas) walk away with foot-in-mouth.
Additionally, you should rethink your logic about that comment regarding the Pac-10 schedule favoritism. The Pac-10 is GUARANTEED a BCS bid for their champion, so they need not favor the supposedly "dominant" team. If they were concerned about making more money, they would try for two BCS bids by showing favoritism to teams like Oregon or UCLA who have been on the BCS bubble. The fact of the matter is that it's a trend across college football that teams from the south manage not to play tough games in the north in November. Wouldn't it be interesting if once in a while a NC game between teams like Miami and Ohio State happened in Minnesota rather than Arizona? One would hope that, at the very least, the Pac-10 would make USC and UCLA play in Oregon in November sometimes, and the ACC would make Miami and Georgia Tech play in Boston in November sometimes, etc.Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 30, 2006 10:27 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Diggs, didn't you guys just bring in a couple of freshman RB's and a freshman QB - and end up doing pretty fair? Now, some of the pre-season predictions got you at #3 with USC at #4 (before all the freshman runners were commited). Now, how can you be such a hypocrite as to not think that a freshman player could not make major contributions almost immediately? You're a clown! Didn't Maurice Clarett lead OSU to a National Title? Didn't Adrian Peterson take Oklahoma to the game? Didn't Reggie Bush and LenDale White get SC a share when they were freshman? Most of you inbred hillbillies don't have the sense that God gave to a grasshopper. You think we're gonna go from blowing teams out by thirty to losing four games? I have already explained to you morons that the people we are losing belonged to our weakest recruiting classes. The best players haven't even hit the field yet. Get it?
Tommie Trojan
Gerald said:
posted on January 30, 2006 12:28 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan:
Aaargh! You guys make me so sick! You beat out my Bulldogs for Stafon Johnson! Then again, you cannot blame Johnson, because unlike UGA with their FSU - loving head coach, USC actually runs the football. USC will have two #1 draft picks at RB this year where UGA, which USED TO BE TAILBACK U BEFORE THEY SOLD OUT TO THE PASSING GAME, hasn't had one in years and have had only two since 1991 (Robert Edwards, Garrison Hearst). Heck, UGA has only had one 1,000 yard rusher since Garrison Hearst. Oh well. Since my team isn't running the ball, I may actually be forced to start rooting for USC if they keep running it so well.
AzTank said:
posted on January 30, 2006 1:55 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Tommie, my concern is with the O-line. 3 starters gone, and other than the kid from Colorado, I am not seeing much action on the recruiting front to deal with it. A mediocre o-line means a mediocre season with as many as 4 losses. (Trust me here...I am forced to watch the NFL football Caridnals with loads of offensive skill position talent struggle) This would truly make me ill. Help me avoid hurling my lunch and please give us a recap of o-line recuits from the previous 2 years. FIGHT ON!
Aaron said:
posted on January 30, 2006 2:19 PM — 192.207.114.20 — link — abuse?
Don't look now but USC will be 0-1 and quite possibly 0-2. The game in Fayetteville is a statement game for the Hogs and they will be very good on offense and significantly improved on defense. With that being the first real game for USC's entirely new starting offense, they're gonna have their hands full and not come out on top.
Woo Pig Sooiee!
posted on January 30, 2006 3:25 PM — 68.35.231.61 — link — abuse?Mike Boone said:
If USC loses to Arkansas the entire state of California will fall into the Pacific Ocean.
AzTank said:
posted on January 30, 2006 5:09 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Aaron is drinking too much moonshine. I loved it when Arkansas took the early lead this year and the players on the sidelines were heard yelling "they are just an average SEC team." Well 70 points later and we all new that lie for what it was.
Diggs the Mountie said:
posted on January 30, 2006 6:26 PM — 68.80.255.161 — link — abuse?
Tommie T: All I have to say is you are a moron for saying that USC has the National Title wrapped up before the season even starts. Do you really think that replacing Leinart,Bush, and White is gonna be that simple? Simply put those 3 players carried the whole Trojan team on the incredible run they've had. Those guys were amazing athletes, and replacing them will be...well lets just say nearly impossible. Oh yeah and back to my point that I was trying to make about the Bo Jackson comment: YOU have this guy being the next Bo Jackson and has never even played a down at the college level , with that comment you COMPLETELY and UTTERLY prove that YOUR the MORON on FANBLOGS. I see that you had nothing to say about my correction of your recruiting claim, and here's why: The SEC recruits great defensive players as well as offensive players... hold up before you say anything I know your defensive commits look good on paper, but for some reason when it comes game time USC's defense still seems to be sitting on the bench instead of on the field trying to make a play. VINCE YOUNG (ONLY ONE MAN)DEMORALIZED the whole USC defense from start to finish. So until USC starts PLAYING DEFENSE they have no shot at winning the National Championship this year! Mark it down Tommie Boy.
Diggs the MountieStodle said:
posted on January 30, 2006 6:29 PM — 192.147.171.224 — link — abuse?
What are you guys talking about with "Arizona State" and "Oregon"? Cal will be the team to beat next year because they don't lose a single player to graduation or the draft (that's why they recruited so poorly). They had some real barnburnerners with Oregon, Oregon State and UCLA, and next year they'll have what it takes to win games like those. And they play some good teams early, which will work to their advantage: Minnesota, Tennessee and then Arizona State. I could see the PAC-10 Championship being decided on November 18th.
Arizona State will be more of the same, with 3 losses on offense and 7 on defense and two phenom QB's.
Oregon might do better at QB with Dixon, and they're losing the typical amount on defense and only 2 on offense. They'll beat Oklahoma, who's losing a lot more and have to play at awful Autzen.
Arizona... I don't see it. Who's coming back that would make you think they'll be better? They certainly won't have a better passing game than Az State. Sure they beat UCLA late and had Az State against the wall, but 3-8? Don't spit on me and tell me it's raining. They got one 5 star recruit and maybe they'll go 4-7 or even 5-6.
USC is losing a ton but they have yet to field their most talented players. Expect a slow start, a game at Arkansas, but Nebraska won't have a pulse. The stretch will be Oregon, Cal and Notre Dame, each being about the same. At least they're at home.
Gerald said:
posted on January 30, 2006 6:41 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
AzTank:
"Well 70 points later and we all new that lie for what it was." Was it as big a lie as how USC was supposedly the greatest team ever? More like the greatest team to lose to 8 - 6 Cal and to duck the #2 team in the national title game in 2003 and 2004 only to lose in 2005. USC got their jollies blowing out a team filled with freshmen and sophomores, but later on we all saw how meaningless - and classless - it was. Should have saved the 70 that you poured on a bunch of 17 and 18 year olds playing their first college game for a real team, fellas! Of course, since these same people were talking about how 8 - 5 Auburn, 8 - 4 Fresno, and a Notre Dame team that beat nobody better than Navy were great teams, so maybe they just honestly did not know what a real team was until they played one. And lost. In L.A. Despite all those fumbles and special teams blunders, they still lost. In L. A. Well, better luck next year guys. We know that you guys are going to go 12 - 0 and be right back in the national title game next year like you always do. Hopefully there won't be another media - puffed up fraud led by a freshman tailback, a QB with shredded knees, and a bunch of JV guys in the secondary to play you in another fraud title game for another fraud title.
Aaron said:
posted on January 30, 2006 7:08 PM — 192.207.114.20 — link — abuse?
The team that lost by 70 points in going to be much different from the team that is on the field IN FAYETTEVILLE next year. And that goes for USC, too. Go ahead and doubt all you want, but ask Texas how hard it was to come in and get a win. This will be the biggest game in Arkansas since that one and the Hogs will prevail.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on January 30, 2006 10:10 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
I'll mark it down Mountie. Here's another statement that's really gonna hurt your ears. I think Steve Slaton looks like the next Reggie Bush and that Jason Gwaltney may be the next LenDale White. Now, did that kill ya'? It is the truth. We wanted Gwaltney bad. Slaton is just way too fast. So, your in for a good run with those two guys totin' the pig. See, I don't have to hate your team because it is good. I'm just hopin' that we get to meet you at the "Big Dance" next year. If you can't dig that - then you must be Diggs the Imposter. I'm not the one who has claimed these lofty comparisons for Stafon Johnson. Other football people "in the know" say he has that kind of power and breakaway speed. That's all it means. Can he reach those guys potential? Unlikely. Players like Herschel Walker and Bo Jackson only come around every ten years or so. Me, myself, I'd be happy if he turned out more like Earl Campbell or Eric Dickerson. No matter who they compare the guy to (and most players get compared to someone), if he averages 1,500 yards and 20 TD's over the three years, I'll be a real happy camper.
Tommie Trojan
AzTank said:
posted on January 31, 2006 11:10 AM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
I am certainly not going to make excuses for the loss this year in the title game. VY is a stud and that was one of the best games I have ever seen. That being said, losing in the final seconds to a team like that shows that USC did indeed belong there. All the REAL Trojan fans knew that your defense was suspect this year. you can't lose guys lie Udeze, Polomalu, Tatupu, Cody, Patterson etc... and replace them right away. On top of those losses in the last couple of years, the guys that were slated to replace them had injury problems. So to say that Arkansas had a young team, while true, ignored the fact that USC's defense was also very young. Oh, and one more thing...Why is it that everyone says how tough the SEC and Big Ten are until USC beats their teams? Auburn twice, Arkansas, Michigan, Iowa in addition to Big 12 Oklahoma(Damn Texas!), and ACCs Va Tech. Then the excuse is always...well they were having a down year. At least we put them on the schedule and not Florida A&M!
TROJANS4LIFE said:
posted on January 31, 2006 1:01 PM — 72.132.55.173 — link — abuse?
I don't care what anyone says, USC is not only going to be the best team in the Pac-10 AGAIN but will be playing in a BCS game come January next year. There is so much F'N talent in SC that it is ridiculous. Look at the Trojans 2006 incoming recruiting class. Pete Carroll will always get the best players not only in Cali but throughout the nation and will allow the Trojans to compete every year. Honestly, who wouldn't want to play for SC compared to all the other crappy teams in the Pac-10. SC has History, Tradition, Heisman Winners, Championships, Bowl Games, Success, Academics and Environment (Los Angeles), qualities that many of the Pac-10 teams really do not have may be the exception of UCLgay but were talkin' about college football here not basketball. Don't get me wrong many of the Pac-10 teams are good and getting better but none of them is good enough to win a national championship besides USC. Honestly, in the past 50 years I think only Washington in 1991 has won a national championship coming from the Pac-10 besides USC but look how they turned out. Until someone from the Pac-10 consistantly wins meaning BCS games and national championships as USC has done lately than they will always be inferior to the Trojans. Fight On Forever Baby! USC=University of Several Championships.
Gerald said:
posted on January 31, 2006 2:00 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
AzTank:
Oh please. So, you want to replay that game with Udeze, Polomalu, Tatupu, Cody, and Patterson? Only if Texas gets to replay it with Cedric Benson, Derrick Johnson, Roy Williams, Marcus Tubbs (all drafted higher than the USC players) and Nate Vasher (who inexplicably dropped to the 4th round but starts for that great Chicago Bear defense).
"Why is it that everyone says how tough the SEC and ... are until USC beats their teams?" Please, really USC fans, bragging about victories over a pair of 5 loss Auburn teams and a 7 loss Arkansas team is embarrassing. Quit it, please! You west coast guys are better off saying how ASU and OSU "almost" beat LSU.
Gerald said:
posted on January 31, 2006 2:23 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
TROJANS4LIFE:
Thank you for buttressing my arguments. You are honest, insightful, and practically 100% accurate, especially with the "Don't get me wrong many of the Pac-10 teams are good and getting better but none of them is good enough to win a national championship besides USC." And how about "Until someone from the Pac-10 consistantly wins meaning BCS games and national championships as USC has done lately than they will always be inferior to the Trojans." And how about "Honestly, who wouldn't want to play for SC compared to all the other crappy teams in the Pac-10. SC has History, Tradition, Heisman Winners, Championships, Bowl Games, Success, Academics and Environment (Los Angeles), qualities that many of the Pac-10 teams really do not have may be the exception of UCLA but were talkin' about college football here not basketball."
It took one of the PAC - 10's own to articulate in one short post what I have consistently failed to in my many long diatribes. Bravo TROJANS4LIFE. Tommie Trojan, The Mayor, Duckman, Az, have at him!
Diggs the Mountie said:
posted on January 31, 2006 4:11 PM — 68.80.255.161 — link — abuse?
Gwaltney is no longer a Mountaineer apparently because after his injury, he supposedly got homesick, started missing class, and completely stopped doing his homework. He's gonna be attending junior college until he can get his grades up to par. Gwaltney is supposed to be looking at Maryland for his return , but I hear USC, and Ohio St. have their eyes on him also.
Stodle said:
posted on January 31, 2006 5:50 PM — 192.147.171.224 — link — abuse?
Hello everyone! I think you guys are all missing the point. It's CAL STUPID! One year that the game's not close and it seems like you just ignore them!
Anyways Gerald:
LSU beats OSU and ASU
USC beats AKST and AuburnSo by this logic you can definitely see that the SEC is better than the PAC-10. Brilliant!
The Mayor said:
posted on January 31, 2006 6:25 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
My argument has only been that the Pac-10 is not "weak" not that they are "superior" to other conferences.
I agree that it is hard to recruit against USC and UCLA. It is especially hard competing against the Southern California weather and media exposure. That's what makes Oregon's success over the last 11 seasons even more impressive (90-42).
Pacific Northwest Schools have fared quite well in the current decade. Washington, Washington State (3 times), Oregon (twice) and Oregon State have all finished in the Top 10 at least once since the 2000 Season.
This does not compare with USC's current run and their storied history; it does show that the rest of the conference can produce quality programs with the “table scraps” left by our neighbors to the south.
The sun does not always shine on USC. They also had a mediocre run in the 90’s despite all of the positive benefits described by previous Trojan bloggers (1996 – 2000: 37 wins, 34 losses, 0-2 in Bowl Games and no finishes in the Top 25). I couldn’t find home attendance records for that time but I bet it wasn’t pretty.
What is amazing to me is the success of Washington State. That school is in the middle of nowhere, somewhere close to middle earth I believe. How they recruit anyone outside of Eastern Washington is beyond me!
For years Oregon was one of the worst programs in the nation. Their current success is all the sweeter after years of failure (1973 – 1977: 15 wins 51 losses). Oregon has spent a great deal of money upgrading their facilities in the last 11 years and other NW schools are doing the same. Perhaps this investment will payoff for the Northwest making them more competitive with USC and ending all the nonsense about the Pac-10 being a weak conference.
Dan said:
posted on February 1, 2006 1:40 AM — 66.71.94.242 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
Nice post, but to say that anyone goes to USC (as opposed to say... Stanford or Cal) for academics is a little off the mark. USC will continue to dominate that league, because of talent that they bring in for about every reason but academics. If we're lucky, though, maybe they'll play young and falter out of the gate next year and we'll get to see Oregon or UCLA or someone else win the conference. Of course, that's not likely to happen, unless some of the teams they play in September play really big. Nebraska has some momentum left over from this year, I suppose, and maybe they'll pull it off.
Gerald said:
posted on February 1, 2006 10:10 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Dan:
Southern Cal does have a better academic reputation and more offerings than a typical football school, just as does Miami. It isn't like "if you aren't going to Stanford, UCLA, or Cal you might as well be going to Taxidermy Tech" type of deal. Southern Cal is a fine school, as is Texas.
Stodle:
My assertion that the SEC is better is based winning more national titles, more different teams winning national titles, and having more contending teams (meaning the number that win 10 games or more over a period of time and not just once every 6 or 7 years), and superior talent (which is what you need to win national titles and have contending teams). I am still waiting for the PAC - 10 fans to make their case, and all I get is "USC beat Auburn" and "all the experts say that USC was clearly better than LSU and Auburn."
tommie trojan said:
posted on February 1, 2006 10:42 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Dan:
Even if Nebraska pulls off the 2nd greatest upset in the history of sports - it's not gonna do Cal, Oregon, UCLA or anybody else in the Pac-10 any good. Your gonna have to beat USC yourselves to win the Pac-10. You know what I find funny? It's that everybody wants USC to fall apart rather than for their own teams to step up to the plate. You guys want to win because of somebody else's misfortune rather than your own excellence. That is why it's not happening for your teams. It's a karma thing. USC wants all their competition to do well and play well. As a Trojan fan - I want every team on our schedule to lose only one game all year. I want to see great teams play great teams. As hard as it hurt to lose that game to Texas - we got to play in one of the greatest games ever. We got to see Vince Young and the Texas teams earn one of the greatest National Championships ever fought for. My hat is off to Texas! They are to be honored as a great National Champion - which they are. I don't hope that their program has to fall apart so they may lose. I hope they go undefeated until we get another shot at them. And, I hope that every Pac-10 team steps into the arena undefeated at the time of our conquest. That only further enhances our reputation as well as the Pac-10's overall. So, good luck to all your teams until even when you have to play us. You see, we were not unlucky in the Texas game. USC played a tremendous game in that game - it's just that Texas played one whale of a game also. So, we don't have to wish you ill will to win a game. We hope that you do your best always. But, the fact is, we are only going to reload and not rebuild. Your teams better bring their A-games next year as the goal is to go undefeated again.
Tommie Trojan
AzTank said:
posted on February 1, 2006 12:19 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Gerald
The argument over the better conference is ludicrous to say the least. The ONLY way to really determine such a thing is head to head competition. To be sure, the PCA 10 has some, shall we say struggling programs. But they are no worse than Vandy, and South Carolina. Traditionally good programs such as Washington and Alabama have shown that reaching the bottom of a conference isn't all that hard to do. Georgia, who puts a solid team together every year seemingly never reaches their potential (See UCLA). Then some team in each conference seems to implode every year...See Tennessee and Arizona State. I am going to give credit to Auburn, LSU, ASU and USC for reaching outside their conference for quality competition. Did LSU know that ASU was going to lay an egg this year? Nope, so give them credit for taking what looked like a tough game. 3 years ago Auburn was #1 in all the pre-season polls..did USC know that Auburn was going to hit the skids? NO, so you have to give USC and Auburn credit for scheduling some competition. From what I have seen the head to head matchups have by and large been competitive affairs and I hope it continues.
Let's settle this once and for all. Vandy Vs Stanford for the national title!
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 1, 2006 1:15 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Hey Gerald:
I'm gonna try and help you out here. I have never contended that the Pac-10 is better than the SEC. Top to bottom - I think that the SEC is stronger. For sure, their top five teams are stronger than the Pac-10's are. There is no doubt. My contention is that your best team is not necessarily better than the Pac-10's best. We've never gotten to play. So, I will always resist that argument. I think the talent down south gets divided up too much. And, here's some more ammunition for you: you are the great researcher and I want you to prove this point. Since more SEC players do become pro players - I want to see how many more SEC players went pro after their junior years than the other conferences have had. I will bet that the SEC leads in that category also.
My point is that this further strips SEC teams of the talent that they would have had. How many great senior seasons were had before juniors could go pro? Tony Dorsett led Pitt to an NC as did Marcus Allen at USC. Barry Sanders records would not have happened. Archie Griffin would not have the two Heisman's. Any many other great senior seasons happened that changed the history of college football. Undoubtedly, the SEC has lost many tremendous senior seasons to the NFL draft early. So, be honest, and let's see what you can come up with on this idea. But remember, my contention is that your best team is not proven to be the best in the land even if it wins the BCS Championship game. To me - the BCS is just BS. It is just another way of trying to pit to "supposedly best" teams together for the title. I don't buy it. Now, maybe last year they got it right. Maybe, Ohio State was really the 2nd best team or Penn State was. You can now make the argument that USC did not belong there. And, I can't argue it being that Ohio State also lost to Texas by three, but, Penn State beat Ohio State. Maybe Penn State was the 2nd best team.
Fact is: there are great teams and players in the SEC. I personally am gonna be rooting for Florida, LSU and Auburn to all go undefeated for as long as they can. And, I do believe, that if an SEC can go unbeaten next year - they certainly would belong in the BCS Title game. And, if they were not, that would be why I think the BCS stinks. I am gonna hope for a USC vs SEC Champ showdown next year. Not to prove any points - just to enjoy that game.Tommie Trojan
TROJANS4LIFE said:
posted on February 1, 2006 3:43 PM — 72.132.55.173 — link — abuse?
My prediction of the 2006 season (12-0 or 11-1)
09/02/06 Arkansas Fayetteville, Ark.-Win
09/16/06 Nebraska L.A. Coliseum-Win
09/23/06 Arizona Tucson, Ariz.-Win
09/30/06 Washington State Pullman, Wash.-Win
10/07/06 Washington L.A. Coliseum-Win
10/14/06 Arizona State L.A. Coliseum-Win
10/28/06 Oregon State Corvallis, Ore.-Win
11/04/06 Stanford Palo Alto, Calif.-Win
11/11/06 Oregon L.A. Coliseum-Win
11/18/06 California L.A. Coliseum-Win
11/25/06 Notre Dame L.A. Coliseum-Win?
12/02/06 UCLgAy Pasadena, Calif.-WinYes, all ya'll haters better believe it. I predict no expect the Trojans to either be undefeated or lose one close game probably against Notre Dame or if lucky UCLgAy. Notre Dame has a solid squad and coaching staff and it is going to be a pretty good challenge but since it is going to be at the L.A. Coliseum I expect the Trojans to pull through. When it comes to the Bruins, even though the game is going to be played in Pasadena this year, half the stadium is still going to be filled with Trojan fans. I expect the Trojans to leave the Bruins in Ruins~Again. Arizona is going to be better but they still have long ways to go to beat USC thus the Trojans will that one. Washington State, Washington, Stanford and Oregon State is going to be pretty easy and USC cruises. The game against Arkansas might be interesting but since its the 1st game of the season, Pete Carroll will have the team ready by than which means Victory. Also, the games between Oregon, Cal, ASU & Nebraska are going to be played at the L.A. Coliseum and I expect the Trojans to be victorious in those games because home field advantage like the game against the Irish is going to play a big factor. I know many people think that USC is going to become like Miami after there run but I expect the Trojans to be better and continue where they left off which is consistantly dominating the Pac-10 Conference and getting BCS bids. FIGHT ON!
Gerald said:
posted on February 1, 2006 3:53 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan:
How's that SEC recruiting? 2 teams in the top 5 (#1 Florida, UGA). 4 in the top 10 (LSU, Auburn). 6 in the top 20 (Ole Miss, Alabama). 7 in the top 25 (Tennessee), over half the conference! (South Carolina, Mississippi State, Vandy, Kentucky, and Arkansas bring up the rear 5, although South Carolina and Arkansas would figure to be in the top 35 as well).
No one else is close! And for all of those "the SEC cannot score" folks, it including the nation's top running QB (Tebow to Florida), the nation's top spread QB (Mustain to Arkansas), the nation's top dropback QB (Stafford to UGA), and the nation's top RB (Williams to LSU).
Now let us look at the PAC 10. 1 team in the top 5 (USC). After that, you get Arizona at 18, UCLA at 20, and Cal at 23. That is not good enough, PAC - 10! After the SEC, it is the Big 12: The Big 12 has Texas at 3, OU at 8, then Texas Tech at 16 and A&M at 25. The Big 10 has Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan in the top 12 but no one else. After them is the ACC, not a single top 10 team but 4 in 11 - 25.
Straggles include Notre Dame at 5 and Pitt at 11. Moving on up: Notre Dame. How the mighty have fallen? FSU, Tennessee, Nebraska, and Miami. Skyrocketing? Ole Miss with their best class since segregation.Once again, you have the SEC with the best talent, the best coaches, the best competition, and the best league.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/football/ncaa/newberg.top25/index.html
Stodle said:
posted on February 1, 2006 4:20 PM — 192.147.171.224 — link — abuse?
I love how SEC guys like to point out that they have a lot of talent, either with NFL stars or great recruits coming in. With the way they've played this year, you'd think SEC folks would want to be a little quieter about that.
The Mayor said:
posted on February 1, 2006 4:46 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
Congratulations to the SEC for a great "recruiting" year again. I hope all your high school recruits live up to their hype for the next 3 years.
I can't see any reason for the rest of us to even play college football, we'll just mail in our losses since none of us can compete with your beloved SEC.
It's a shame that the games actually have to be played on the field.
The Mayor said:
posted on February 1, 2006 5:05 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
Thanks for the link to the SI web page and rankings. My beloved Ducks had the worst rated recruiting in the Pac-10 at #51 in the nation.It will be interesting to see how this plays out for us over the next few years...?
I'll still be a true blue fan if these prognosticators are correct and Oregon is unable to compete even in the “weak” Pac-10 in the years to follow.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 1, 2006 5:16 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Very impressed! Tremendous recruiting year for the SEC - and, Florida State jumped way up on the last day. Yep! Can't argue any of that - unless you wanted to claim that all the talent down south is way overrated. I'm not gonna do that. But you yourself have made mention of the fact that: four starts five stars mean not much. Three star players quite often pan out just as well. But, I figure that overall - your chances of success with higher rated recruits is probably better. So, without question the SEC brought in the Recruiting National Championship - even if USC does end up on top. And, it looks as though several of the very top offensive performers will be playing in the SEC in the coming years. The future looks very bright.
Tommie Trojan
JC in SoCAL said:
posted on February 1, 2006 8:05 PM — 67.113.165.178 — link — abuse?
Yeah, yeah, congrats SEC, man it cracks me up how full of their own conference these guys are. Cheer for a team, not a conference. You cheer for your conference when your team sucks. Its hilarious. Before we crown Florida the national champions first lets have Chris Leak do something with all the hype surrounding him.
Congrats to Coach Carroll and company on another great class. They got a lot of players at all the skill positions and a boat load on the defensive end of things. I think the answer to the running back issue is pretty much solved. The trojans have some studs coming in to go with the rbs they already have waiting in the wings. I did however want to see them clean up a little more on the line. Both offense and defensive lines lost players and are going to be real young. I just wanted to see them add some depth.
Now that Signing Day is almost over, when does Spring Ball start. Only 7 months till season opener, lets get this thing started.Fight on Trojans...
TROJANS4LIFE said:
posted on February 1, 2006 11:03 PM — 72.132.55.173 — link — abuse?
To the Mayor,
Actually my USC schedule is correct. You just got your words all mixed up. That game is a definite win for the Trojans. Not only is the game at the L.A. Coliseum but I just don't think that Oregon has the talent to beat SC. No offense but your incoming recuriting class was pretty pathethic by all means. You guys have a good coach and pretty decent players but it says a lot when Washington State has a better recruiting class than you. You guys were in the Top 10 last year and I'll give you that but I just think that Trojans are too good and have too much depth for you guys to overcome.The Mayor said:
posted on February 2, 2006 2:57 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
TROJANS4LIFE
I double checked the Internet...it still comes up the same...Oregon over USC on 11/11/06.
My obnoxious prognosticating of the Duck/Trojan game outcome next season is a sarcastic jibe at the arrogance of USC fans.
I, for one, appreciate the funds that USC has brought home to the Pac-10 over the last 3 years with their BCS Bowl appearances.
I don't get my shorts in a bunch over HS and JC recruiting classes. I think it's a bunch of hype, rating 17-19 year old high school players, there's a large percentage for error in rating them at this point in their young careers.
You have earned your current success, enjoy it while you can. I hope that you will wear your humility with equal enthusiasm when another Pac-10 school wins the conference.
Until then, the Trojans have a losing streak of “one” just like Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Arizona and Washington State and there’s nothing that you can do about it for another 213 days.
Duckman said:
posted on February 2, 2006 4:47 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
I have not posted in a wile because the workload in my current classes. I hope you all didn’t miss me to much.
Mayor, your posts are articulate and objective as usual. Even if you were not a ducks fan I think I would like you. You should be happy to know I took your advice that you gave me in a previous post. Thanks.
Tommie, You seem to be taking your usual stance. “blah, blah, blah, Trojans will be even better next year, blah, blah, blah”. Probably not going to happen, but eat it up while you can.
Gerald, I see you still believe the SEC teams are gods and everyone else should be happy that they let us play their game. I have grown tired of thrashing your posts (like I have done many times in the past-you know its true!) so I will not proceed to do so. The one thing I will point out is that in some posts you say the BCS has no credibility. In other posts you use rankings and national championships as a foundation for your arguments. OOPS. Long live SEC arrogance and thank you for allowing us to play you game-LOL!! I hope that the PAC-10 will never develop that same attitude.
P.S. GO DUCKS!!!
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on February 2, 2006 8:51 AM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?
Word just in from the NCAA: With all the great athletes going to USC the NCAA has canceled all NCAA Divsion 1-A football games and has awarded USC and Oregon a share of the BCS titles until the year 3000 or until the "Warren Report" is given to the public, whichever comes first !!!!!
AzTank said:
posted on February 2, 2006 11:01 AM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
ND 444
Petty funny stuff! While I am a DIEHARD USC fan. (Can't help it..grew up in the shadows and all of that) I am pleased that ND is on the way back. It sucked when SC couldn't beat you and it sucked when you guys weren't competitive. Kind of like Lakers/Celtics when one teams gets bad. It just isn't any fun. You guys had an awesome recruiting class, have a great coach and things look to be pretty interesting for the next few years. I predict that one of our teams is going to lose a chance at a national title because of this game. That being said...Sell your damn TV network and join a friggin conference, you arrogant, spoiled, ..blah blah blah!
AzTank said:
posted on February 2, 2006 11:15 AM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
I am mildly concerned about Arkansas, we should manage Nebraska at home (but they had a solid recruiting class last year, so who knows how those sophs will do this year), and downright agitated about ND. Hopefully we have gotten past struggling with Kal (from the People's Republik of Berkley)That leaves FUCLA and the waterfowl as potential stumbling blocks. There is a gotcha game at U of A. They are getting better and are tough at home. Gents, I don't think this is going to be an easy one.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 2, 2006 11:22 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
You know ND444 - you're an A-Hole! Until you actually win a game - maybe you ought to keep your mouth shut. Your not real bright and your team looked pathetic against Ohio State. I don't think that all teams ought to cancel - but, Notre Dame probably should.
Tommie Trojan
Aquaman said:
posted on February 2, 2006 12:23 PM — 65.2.174.17 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan, once again, you've bitten off more than you can chew.
SC can go undefeated this season, but it's not gonna happen, you lose in Corvallis, then the wheels fall off.
Just tell me who your QB is? does he have playing time? You can have all the WR's in the world but who's gonna throw it to them?
And your just about to lose Hazelton to the U.
Just be happy that you play in the Wack10, cause if you played real talent on both sides of the ball, you get exposed.
Gerald said:
posted on February 2, 2006 1:44 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
stodle:
And how did the SEC play this year? They had more teams with 9 or more wins than any other conference, and more teams ranked in the top 15 than any other conference. SEC teams beat Miami, FSU, Arizona State, Texas Tech, Georgia Tech, and Boise State out of conference. And this was a "down year!" Better players, better teams.
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on February 2, 2006 2:22 PM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?
Tommie T-
I think the Irish have won a few games....A few more the USC to be exact. Not maybe in the last three years, but football has been around for a little longer then that. Yes, ND did lose to Ohio State, no shame in that.
Just nice to see you get all angry over nothing more then a blog.
Going back on patrol now, to find some more bad guys. Good luck sitting in front of your computer....loser !!!!!Trouty said:
posted on February 2, 2006 2:32 PM — 71.80.205.13 — link — abuse?
Aquaman, im sorry to say this but Hazelton sent in his letter yesterday. Hes a Trojan!. The QB situation is looking awsome considering we have two of the best QB's in the nation coming out of high school. Mark Sanchez and John David Booty. You might of herd of them i dont know? Um frankly your just jelous and I couldnt blame you because SC has been domination recruiting for the last three years now with this recent class one of the best maybe ever in the history of college football! Aquaman i dont know who your team is and I dont care because right now USC is on top of the college football world. The media loves them, the state of california loves them so just get use to seeing USC in lots more national title games. I think SC passes notre dame in this decade for most national championships. USC means University of Several Championships. We own this decade in college football!
Fight on beat the... as my good friend would say (insert trojan opponet here)
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 2, 2006 3:50 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Who's this clown? Aquaman? What's that an AKA for the WaterBoy (Bobby Bouchet)? Were you the water boy for your high school team?
Troy is gonna lose to another Oregon school with a name like Beavers or Ducks? Don't make me laugh, dude! Some of these comics on here are just killin' me already.
I can't tell if your really puttin' me on about "who's gonna throw it to them?" or if your really that pathetically moronic. We could put the Trojan's water boy back there and he'd be a lot better than whatever the Beavers are gonna end up with.
But just in case you really are that lame, and it's against my policy (never hip a lame), I'll clue you in. This years (2006) top QB coming out of high school is Matthew Stafford at Georgia. Last years (2005) top QB out of high school is Mark Sanchez at USC. Three years ago (2004) the top QB was Rhett Bomar at Oklahoma and four years ago (2003) it was John David Booty (from your home state of Louisiana) at USC. Now, these are consensus opinions that think that these are the elite players at their QB positions - and the players most likely to dominate. Now, Booty was also rated the #1 player overall and graduated after his junior year in high school and joined USC then. He normally would have been in the same class as Bomar. Nevertheless, we have two of the top four rated QB's over the last four years to throw the dayum pig, dude. I don't think that is going to be a problem. The only thing that you really have to wonder about is: how many points will the Trojans bury the Beavers by in Corvallis? And, PS, Hazelton isn't gonna go anywhere else no matter what is idiot father thinks about it. He wants to be a Trojan - and he will be one.Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 2, 2006 4:26 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
ND444:
You sound like a real hero! I wonder? Are you one of those flat foots who has to go around shootin' innocent civilians or do you just write us tickets and fine us all day long in order to exact revenue for the "criminal politicians" that you work for? Nevertheless, what you do for a job is really to protect the criminals from the civilians. And, what I do for work takes way more brains than you could ever even comprehend. And, oh by the way, we're gonna bury your Irish Azz next year.
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 2, 2006 7:46 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SuperHero444:
Oh, and I was referring to your team beating ours. Yes, I understand "The Irish" have won a few games - but, you haven't beaten us in quite awhile and you haven't been able to win a Bowl game in an ever longer period of time than that! I said "game" - not beat some weakazz team! I also understand that we went several years without being able to beat Notre Dame when we were a "weakazz" team and Notre Dame was dominate. Just because you only lost by three at home - don't mean you're all the way back. We'll see what happens next year at the Coliseum. That'll probably be a good clue for you.
So, 444, is undoubtedly your badge number. What's that? Four .44 Mag's on your person? One on each hip, one in your boot, and one up under your skull cap? Dude, you been watchin' too many Dirty Harry movies. Hey, by the way, John Wayne was a Trojan. Played tackle on the varsity. Name was Marion Motley then - I think. Could be wrong, again. But, he did play for USC. Why don't you try watchin' "the Cowboys". Now, that's a different kind of flick where the good guy dies (John Wayne), and all the "little people" become the real heroes. Might even bring a tear to your eye. Oh, but don't worry, the scumbag suffers a heinous death. That'll "Make your day"!Tommie Trojan
The Mayor said:
posted on February 2, 2006 9:29 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan,
John Wayne's real name was Marrion Morrison...he indeed went to school at USC where he was in the Sigma Chi fraternity.
Man is ND444 going to be upset with you when he reads your taunts after his shift.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 2, 2006 9:44 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
This is a recant on what I said about Hazelton's father (referred to as an idiot). Just read an article on what he really had to say - and, he sounds like the best father you could possibly have. I thought that maybe he was just one of those controlling people who wanted to get his kid to the Pros as fast as possible - and, he might have thought that Vidal might have to sit too long at USC. MY BAD! I was completely wrong in that assumption.
The problem is that the father wants to make sure that Vidal doesn't get too caught up in the "Hollywood thing" and starts drifting. He's not real sure if Coach Carroll can make sure that his son is taken care of and keeps his grades up. Academics are his major concern and wants Vidal in school completing his work. Vidal on the other hand, wants to go to USC badly, to the point of having disrespected his father. He wants to play with the USC quarterback's where he knows he's gonna be catchin' a ton of balls. Evidently, his QB's in high school were mediocre and he wasn't having much fun playing ball that way. So, he's dead set on USC. His father wants to make sure he understands completely what his responsibility is if he heads out for the west coast. His father may not fully understand how dedicated Carroll is to keeping his players out of trouble and academically eligible. Carroll gave the father the impression that none of this was a big deal. And, to Carroll, maybe it is not. But, to the father who very much wants the best for his son, it is of the utmost importance. The father would prefer that his son attend Penn State (where he's closer to home and farther away from Hollywood), but will sign the letter, if Vidal fully understands what is expected of him and still insists that he wants to play for the Trojans.Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 2, 2006 10:00 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
Yeh, I'm real worried that the guy's gonna come out here for the game and take me out. Probably will track me down by my blogs or just run a plain ol' "make on me". I can just see him now flashin' me the lights and ordering me through the loudspeaker to "Pull over to the curb! No not there! Take it around the corner"! As I start to roll down my window - I catch a glimpse of him in my side view mirror. It's dark - but he's wearing shades and a helmet. I can see that his teeth are clenched together real hard and that the crow's feet from his squinty eyes run half way around his head. He demands to see my drivers license and says, "Feel lucky, punk"? As I reach into my back pocket to produce my wallet - he fires one right into my forehead. He grabs my wallet and removes the two tickets that I had for the USC-Notre Dame game at the Coliseum. As everything begins to fade to black, I hear him exclaim, "You made my day".
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 2, 2006 10:21 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
Here's the real killer! Ready? My father is a retired LA cop who's had to drill about six "bad guys" during his day. I've driven around with my dad in the squad car and seen some things you'd only see on "Cops" today. I was a little guy then.
The guy ticked me off when he called me a loser. Now, if he's talkin' about the Trojans - he's a real joke! Notre Dame has been the "Loser". Or, if he is referring to my playing on the computer all day long, with nothing better to do with myself: well they pay me more money than he'll ever see in his whole life for doing just that. Now, that's even more funny to me. I'm makin' more money writing this blog than he's gonna make getting spit on and shot at tonight. Now, who's really the loser?Tommie Trojan
The Mayor said:
posted on February 2, 2006 10:42 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan,
You mentioned in the Florida schedule blog that...
"...they (Oregon)are historically a middle of the road Pac-10 team "
Since 1995 USC has won 69% of it's games to tie another team for the best winning percentage in the Pac-10. Any idea which school they would be tied with..?
The University of Oregon (90-41).
I picked 1995 as it was Belotti's first year.
...hardly see how that put's us in the "middle" of the Pac-10.
If you want to go Old School on me and toss in our salad days (1969 - 1989) you could state that Oregon is less than middle of the road. But I think the last 10 years has showed that Oregon is truly a quality program.
Pac-10 Winning Percentages from 1995 to 2005:
USC 69% 94-41-1
Oregon 69% 90-41
UCLA 60% 79-52
ASU 58% 75-55
UW 55% 72-58-1
WSU 52% 67-61
OSU 48% 62-66
Stanford 47% 59-65-1
UA 46% 55-76
Cal 45% 58-70Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 12:08 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
No, I thought we'd be goin' back all-time. You're right - for many years now the Ducks have been an "upper tier" Pac-10 team and I'm not surprised at all that they are just slightly behind USC. They were great around the early 60's - but, I remember them as really being poor for many years from 65-90's maybe. That's all. I don't have the exact records for all-time, but, I would imagine that it would go USC, UCLA, Washington, California and the last four - I don't know. Maybe Whazzoo last. I'm considering only the original eight from the old WAA or whatever it was then - I don't remember. Western Athletic Association? I do find it interesting that Cal is last for the last ten years? Amazing.
Tommie Trojan
The Mayor said:
posted on February 3, 2006 2:37 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Tommie T...
"Going back all time?" You're busting my balls, I already know that USC has the edge all time without even looking. I am having a bad year and not making the big coin, this website isn't helping. If I worked this hard at my job I'd be rich.
It took me an hour to pull the Pac-10 data for the last 10 years. I don't know how Gerald does it...he certainly must not have access to the stash of Red Wine and Vodka that I do. I can't remember what I did last week much less how the Ducks have fared throughout history.
Here's a tip though. My lovely and darling spouse of 27 years got me the ESPN College Football Encyclopedia recently. It is awesome (so is she)...I just wish it was available in Excel format so that I could analyze the data as fast as Gerald. I think Gerald has memorized the damn thing...he is amazing with his stats.
11/11/06...looking forward to a Big Beer at the LA Col. watching the Trojans and Drakes.
The Mayor said:
posted on February 3, 2006 2:42 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Anyone out there remember that it was called "The Pac-8?"
Growing up in Eugene, OR I swear it was the Pac-8 and not the AAWU or WAA until UA and ASU joined in the 70's and in became the Pac-10?
The ESPN College Encyclopedia makes no mention of the Pac-8.
I would appreciate your input on this...am I dreaming or just old?
The Mayor said:
posted on February 3, 2006 2:55 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan,
I am glad your father is still with us. Ay my age, not all of my friends can say that. Considering your fathers profession, you are blessed that he's around to keep you in check.
ND444 may be a pain but let's not wish harm in him in his role as a peacekeeper...it is probably the world's worst job.
You ate your crow after the NC game, I did the same after the Holiday Bowl but many of the Irish evidently watched a different Fiesta Bowl that we did. Let it go. The Irish faithful will get their due in LA next year. Irish JT has disappeared so ND 444 has to make up some ground on the obnoxious meter. He calls you names, big deal, don't stoop to his level.
I got to hang out with a few of the real Irish fans when they came out from Indiana for the Stanford game here last November, they were very respectful of the Pac-10, intelligent and had a sense of humor about the role of sports. I'd buy them another drink any day.
USC vs UO 11/11/06 in LA. Big Beers, loser pays. You in?
The Mayor said:
posted on February 3, 2006 4:16 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan,
After a pot of coffee, I went back to 1978, the start of the Pac-10. It is true, Oregon is "middle of the pack" in historical terms. That's what makes winning 10 games a year so sweet now.
USC 67% 228-103-8
UW (ugh!)65% 215-113-3
UCLA 63% 207-115-7
ASU 59% 190-130-4
UO 55% 179-141-4
UA 53% 171-143-8
Stanford 46% 146-166-5
Cal 44% 141-174-5
OSU 31% 99-211-6If Oregon wins 2 more games per year more than the Tojans over the next 25 years we will finally pass USC for wins in the Pac-10. I hope to be around to see it.
Congratulations to the Beavers on their upcoming 100th win as a member of the Pac-10!!! I hope it doesn't come at the expense of the Ducks on Nov 25th...
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on February 3, 2006 7:31 AM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?
Hey Tommie T-
As I've stated in previous blogs I'm sitting over here in Iraq. And betweeen missions, I get on the net to visit this site. I keep up with two things, my Family and Notre Dame. Not just Notre Dame football, but the entire univeristy. Ref the ND 444. I'm a Notre Dame grad in 1994 and my favorite number is 44, thus the 444.
Sorry you get all upset over nothing. Keep bloging away. As for how much you make, who cares....Money isn't everthing, sometimes you have to do something other then sit around and count your cash.
Nice see I can get you all fired up though....Kinda funny...Typical civilian...No Discipline !!!!!
Reading all these blogs, it seems that most of you hate Notre Dame more then you "love" the your own school. "Dome-envy".
Well good luck with your blood-pressure.
Oh, yeah the "Warren Report" is still classified and will not be released until 50 years after the last member has died. Unclass version "black out and deleted" can be viewed at anytime on the net. Look it up.To "The Mayor" and "Gerald" - keep up the good blogs, you guys always have something good to write.
Tommie T- As for watching the Cowboys, I did !!! The Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders were just over here, so was Shannon Elizabeth. Thanks for the tip...
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 10:36 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
There has been a deafening roar of silence, heard around the nation as befuddled NCAA College football fans everywhere, sit in total disbelief that the hated Trojans can once again (for the 3rd year in a row) lead the nation in recruiting. The shock and despair must be overwhelming for all who believed that the mighty Trojan dynasty would soon end, following their last minute defeat to the great Texas Longhorn squad. What was once instant jubilation - has now turned to total dread.
Pete Carroll exclaimed, "This class of freshman is so talented that no less than twelve of these players will make an immediate impact". Frightening indeed! Especially considering what was already left over from previous recruiting hauls. Furthermore, in addition to the five great runners already signed, as each hour further winds down - it looks more and more as if Keiland Williams may indeed sign on with the hated Trojans rather than the Bayou Bengals. A freshman backfield of Stafon Johnson, CJ Gable and Keiland Williams would just be too much for any defense to possibly contain. Reggie Bush and LenDale White would be nothing more than a distant memory - as all of the future Heisman Trophy winners take the field for battle.
It's so quiet, almost the same as it was on 9/11, that you could here a pin drop. The barely hearable sound of sobbing is the only noise escaping from America today.Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 11:01 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
ND444:
Gonna have to eat a little more Crow here. Excuse me, but I took your comment as being one of these patrolman who thinks he's better than the people who pay him. I don't mind you insulting me as a fellow human being, but as a sworn "Officer of the Law" under the badge of authority, I'd have to fire back.
I'd like to say that I appreciate what you are doing for freedom more than I could possibly express. I did my Army time between 73-75'. I'm not gonna say anything more than that. I hope you and the rest of yours get back here soon.
Don't get me wrong: I think that Notre Dame is truly a great program. One of the reasons USC can recruit so well is the fact that we play "the Irish" every year. I understand there is nothing like being a Trojan and running out that tunnel at South Bend. I'm sure that goes both ways. The greatest rivalry there is - USC vs Notre Dame. Your on your way back with Charlie Weis for sure. I believe that it is Coaches that make the programs. Notre Dame was tremendous under Ara Parseghian and Lou Holtz. USC has faired very well under John McKay, John Robinson and now Pete Carroll. I look for many titanic clashes in the next few years as Pete Carroll takes on Charlie Weis. I just think we have the edge right now. I'm not counting on that happening forever. Notre Dame has just had a terrific recruiting class also. It won't be long. My worst moment in life: I was a little kid back in 66' or whatever it was when Notre Dame hammered USC 51-0! Even broke our kickers leg! We even went to the Rose Bowl that year if I remember correctly - or would have. That was a great Notre Dame team that just made us look pathetic! My greatest moment: 1972 and I'm sixteen. Notre Dame scores just before halftime to take a 24-0 lead. It looks hopeless for USC. Just moments before halftime - Anthony Davis runs the ensuing kickoff back for a touchdown. We missed the extra point. Notre Dame goes into the locker room with a 24-6 lead. Anthony Davis runs the opening kickoff of the second half back for another touchdown. Irish lead 24-13! Anthony Davis goes on to score four more touchdowns in the second half - as USC scores forty-nine unanswered points in the second half to win the game 55-24. The most unbelievable thing I have ever witnessed on a football field.Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 11:22 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
Yeh, I remember the Pac-8 well. I even remember Dan Fouts and Bobby Moore. I even remember the "Old style" uniforms and everything. Even though the Ducks uniforms have always been hurtful to the eyes - I liked the old ones better. I have many relatives in both Oregon and Washington. I hope to retire to Oregon someday. You probably have too many ex-Californians already. We have too many people who used to live on other continents here. I even remember all of the mud-baths that the Trojans used to play in up in Oregon. And, all of the foggy games. It was never a gimme game, even in those days, when the weather conditions were "fowl".
Tommie Trojan
AzTank said:
posted on February 3, 2006 12:22 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Is this peace and harmony in the blogosphere?? Just a request from our friends and allies..the Danish.
Due to some tasteless cartoons run in a Danish paper, the entire Muslim world is boycotting our products. As Americans are vigilant keepers of the right to free speech, we (the Danes) have a request. During your upcoming Super Bowl celebrations, please consume large amounts of Havarti cheese, Tuborg or Carleson beer, and baby back ribs. It will help your celebrations and our economy!
The Mayor said:
posted on February 3, 2006 12:27 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
ND444
I didn't know you were overseas. You have earned your right to be obnoxious. Stay safe. This website is the only place that you should be a target.
When I was in the USAF on a remote assignment in Korea in 1981 the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders came to visit. It was the highlight of the horrible year overseas.
Watch your six.
AzTank said:
posted on February 3, 2006 12:28 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Gerald, ND444, Mayor, Duckman et all:
It's FANTASTIC to see loyal fans getting along in the blogosphere. ND, good luck in Iraq. Done my time over there (may answer why I am in Arizona and a die hard Trojan fan), and it ain't a lot of fun! Done my 20 though, and it's time to punch. Unfortunatley the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia has become too expensive for the likes of me, so I will root for MIGHTY MIGHTY USC from afar. For all the haters...as long as Pete stays, you are ALL in trouble!
AzTank said:
posted on February 3, 2006 12:37 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Ok, so with all the objecivity you guys can muster...top 5 (Mayor can go to 10 to get the Ducks in) for next season:
1. Oh How I Hate Ohio State
2. LSU (Shuddup Gerald)
3. USC
4. Notre Dame
5. Florida--Upset pick I know...Just have a feeling.What out though..if SC doesn't lose early and one of those stud QBs starts playin well (See Leinart's first year as starter) it could be all over!
NOTaNOLE said:
posted on February 3, 2006 2:15 PM — 68.204.158.116 — link — abuse?
Tommie, shame ND444 is in Iraq. I was so looking forward to him shooting you right in your big mouth. Do you ever shut up? You blog negatives about EVERY other team in college football but kiss the arse of " The great Texas Longhorns team" who embarrassed you in your own back yard. Go back to your high paying job of viewing kiddie porn and stop filling every other teams blogs with your stupid rants. I'd bet anything in the world that if Pete Carrol read your post he would would slap you himself for emmbarrasing such a fine school as S.C. At least the Mayor is respectful of others and doesn't just set out to Bash everyone not wearing yellow and green. Your like the dumb kid who was held back 4 times in school and still thinks he's tough by bullying kids half his size. Get a real life , kiddie porn viewer!!!
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 3:21 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
NOTaNOLE but.....?
Must be a Gator fan, eh? Hey, what's your deal with kiddie porn, guy? I got ten kids of my own and I run a rather large manufacturing company for a living.
Hey, you never know, "You might get lucky" and ND444 might fly in on a chopper and just take me out like I was a water buffalo or something less than that. But, your wrong dude! I got respect for all good teams. I even got respect for the Gators right now. Great recruiting class and I look for Florida to make a serious run next year. Texas was a great team. I have seen many great teams in my day. Great teams play great in great games. I couldn't say that Texas was great while they were beating up on Colorado and Oklahoma State - sorry! I can understand that they had just beaten a team that had won thirty-five in a row. Now, that is great. But, you probably really think it's easy to get thirty-five in a row and you probably think it's easy to beat the team that had that streak. That's too bad. I don't have any respect for certain people who constantly have to put down what is good. And, unfortunately, you seem to be one of those people. I attack the people who attack me first. Pay attention. You'll notice that. I won't even really attack you back - because you seem to have some serious issues and absolutely no sense of humor. Most of us can talk crap all day long on here. I just defend my team - whom ya'll hate. I expect you to defend yours! And, I fully expect that most people are going to have to hate USC because their own teams are not doing as well. It's human nature. But, not mine! I don't hate on any team at all. I hope all your teams play well and get the chance to take on the Trojans.Tommie Trojan
TROJANS4LIFE said:
posted on February 3, 2006 3:28 PM — 69.230.144.195 — link — abuse?
The Mayor says: In the Pac-10 the private school USC is referred to as the University of Spoiled Children.
I just laugh when I see how much hate and contempt that people have for USC. In my opinion, the only reason why so many schools in the Pac-10 say that USC stands for the University of Spoiled Children is out of sheer jealousy. Anyone that considers themselves smart and rational knows that USC stands for the University of Several Championships. However, to tell you the truth, I rather be called Spoiled anyday than have to live in Arizona, Oregon or Washington cause at least people acknowledge that SC is rich and loaded with money. All the haters can hate as much as they want and people can call us stuck up, arrogant also but while were here pimpin’ in L.A. all you haters are stuck in hell holes like Eugene and Pullman. But when I think of it, if I were attending school in Oregon or Washington State, I would be hating SC also because not only does SC consistently defeat my school in sports but there is no way that I can compete with SC on a academic and financial level. I would be very Jealous that I wasn’t attending a school which is not only one of the premier athletic programs in the nation but also one of the finest academic institutions as well. Every year, USC is consistently in the Top 30 of the annual best national university rankings list. Also, no offense to the ladies but taking women's sports out, the men of Troy have won 73 team national championships which is more than any other university in the nation including 11 for football (only Notre Dame & Alabama have more with 12). The USC Alumni donates more money that any other school in the nation as well including Columbia & Harvard. In addition, USC has one of the best schools in the country in several areas such as law, medicine, business, engineering, cinema, journalism, public policy, architecture, and international relations. Honestly, looking at all the Pac-10 schools, there is no school besides may be UCLgAy or even CAL that is this good athleticlly but also excels academically. Who wouldn't want to be a Trojan? I know George Lucas, John Wayne and Neil Armstrong would definitely agree with me on that statement. Anyone who lives in L.A. know that there is a huge salary differential between what an $C alumni makes and what a UCLgAy alumni makes. Most of the well-paid, top jobs in L.A. are taken by Trojan alumns which says an awful lot about how great SC really is because L.A. is not just any city, it is the 2nd largest city in the U.S. Just go to a USC/UCLgAy football game and you’ll see the difference. While many of the Trojan alumnis/fans drive Mercedes’, BMW’s, Lexus’, Porsche’s, Ferrari’s, Jaguar’s many of the Bruins alumnis/fans drive Mazda’s, Saturn’s, Saab’s, Suburu’s and Suzuki’s. There is a reason why USC is called the University of Several Championships because were winners and people who always lose will always hate the people who always win.....Bottom Line!
One last thing, The Mayor was also saying how if Oregon wins 2 more games per year more than the Tojans over the next 25 years than they will finally pass USC for wins in the Pac-10. I just want to say that the chances of Oregon passing SC in wins is like saying the Red Sox is gonna pass the Yankees in World Series pennants: it ain’t happening. The whole point of winning is to win championships and so far the Ducks haven’t won shit. Until Oregon actually wins a title for a change, they and the rest of the Pac-10 will always be inferior to SC. Fight On!
Aquaman said:
posted on February 3, 2006 3:40 PM — 65.2.26.198 — link — abuse?
As usual, tommie trojan proves that USC doesn't teach humility.
Lets recap: All season you rant about SC's vaunted O, and how when it came to crunch time Bush, Lionheart, and White had the will to win.
Well lets talk reality, on 4and2, you don't convert, and your boy Frostee Rucker, got thawed out. Did he even have a tackle?
Also you didn't win back to back titles, LSU's got the hardware.
Plus, attack me all you want, you just prove that most SC fans would probably kick you ass for all that trash talkin' cause you got nothin' to back it up.
Any QB named Booty is destined to fail.
Check back with me in '07, I'll set you straight once again.Until then, Tommy, get a life.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 4:15 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
AZTank:
I swear those conferences are too tough! The problem is: if your gonna try and pick a National Champion - you gotta find teams that are not going to lose. Ohio State is gonna be good. Lost some defense though. Can they get through the BIG 10 unscathed? That's tough to do. Same problem with LSU, Auburn and Florida. These are all great teams - but can they not lose? Notre Dame and USC play each other - somebody has got to lose once. I'm goin' with two top five's. 1st one is who has the best shot to go unbeaten and win the NC Championship. The 2nd five will be who I think might really be the best teams by the end of the year - regardless of who they might have been beaten by earlier.
List 1 (Best chance to not lose)
1. USC (sorry, softest schedule)
2. Oklahoma (surprise! and I hate it too!)
3. Ohio State (Texas,Penn State and Michigan)
4. Auburn
5. Florida StateList 2 (most likely best team by season's end)
1. Auburn (we wouldn't want these guys then)
2. Ohio State
3. LSU (Perrilloux might be VY by now)
4. USC (we'll see if they got heart)
5. FloridaI'm looking at traditional recruiting plus what might be an overall bias towards any teams. The three SEC teams have recruited well and will be battle tested. Ohio State will be the pre-season #1 - and we know that doesn't always work out. USC gets the softest schedule and the best chance to not lose a game and might get lucky and take it all. But, I don't know if we could handle LSU and Perrilloux or even want Auburn next year with the attitude that they might have. Florida may surprise us all! Other great teams will be Notre Dame, Penn State and Texas by season's end.
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 4:49 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
I'm givin' up on anybody who doesn't play in the PAC-10. No comment on anything other than what we do out here - as nobody else is ever gonna get it. People in the South got some serious problems and I'm through with that. So, that should make em' all happy. What they do down there is fine, and if they don't want to have any respect for any other fine football programs, then so be it. There isn't really much to discuss. We'll just keep winning games and that's it!
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 3, 2006 10:02 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
Yep, were gonna chug some down. In fact we'll just order up a whole dayum brewery if we have to. We're gonna have to get AZTank to cater the Danish. We have got to keep that economy rollin'. I couldn't even imagine a world without Danish beer in it. Does this mean that I got to get rid of Scoo-be-doo out back? Or, are they gonna have him exported back to his naturalized country?
Now, the Ducks better put that soph runner back there and that Dixon better start to get with the program. Didn't you get to keep your WR Williams? No reason the Ducks shouldn't have a good year. But, that 350 pound block of spam that you lost in the middle is gonna hurt. But, if I remember, you guys had a whole bunch of Grade A 100% Beef up there. Yep, we share one common bond Me and You Mayor: our two pathetic teams lost our bowl games. Representatives of the Pac-10's best - we both got smoked. No wonder we have to drink!Tommie Trojan
Dan said:
posted on February 4, 2006 2:29 AM — 66.71.94.242 — link — abuse?
Hey Mayor,
Don't you listen to Rod Tidwell? Those other guys might have the coin, but they'll never have the kwan.
While everyone's talking about Notre Dame's chances next year, try this one out: a rebuilt Penn State defense with incredible secondary speed (Justin King, Deon Butler, maybe A.J. Wallace in his first year?), and the best linebacker corps in the country (Poz, Connor, Shaw plus Sayles and Lee) could just slow down that big Charlie Weis offense enough to give Anthony Morelli a chance to be the hero of the hour. Will he step up? I sure as hell hope so. The all-time series stands at 8-8-1 (8-5 under JoPa). I'm looking for Penn State to exceed expectations once again, and take a one game lead all-time against the Irish.
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on February 4, 2006 7:09 AM — 71.114.96.122 — link — abuse?
AZ Tank -
Here is my view of the top 5:
1. West Virginia
2. LSU
3. Notre Dame
4. Texas
5. USC
5a. OregonReasons why:
West Virginia: Pat White and Steve Slaton have too much talent for the rest of the Big East. Louisville will be the only real challenge. Though Va Tech is no push over, look for VW to pull this one out. WV is BCS bound again.
LSU: Decision time for Les Miles at QB is a big concern but one, most coaches would love to have. Any early travel date to Auburn in Sept and a tough one in the swamp in Oct will provide a stern test. Georgia could fill the spot by LSU in the ranking, they don't play Alabama and strong recruiting helps.
Notre Dame: Talk to me after the fourth game, and I'll be able to provide more info. Ga Tech, Penn St, Mich, and Mich State to start the season. If they can win the first four, the next road block will be USC in the final. Only UCLA could cause problems, but there defense is worse then ND's. But UCLA doesn't have the "gunslinger" anymore.
Texas: A favorable schedule and a great back to back recruiting by Mack Brown. Texas gets Ohio State early which is good for Texas, though Ohio State does have a good offense. Ohio State must replace all the DBs and LBs from last year. Texas will be too much for Ohio State. If Texas gets by Oklahoma and (Heisman Trophy 2006 Winner Adrian Peterson), Then they could be facing WV in Arizona.
USC: It all boils down the the maturation process and talent USC puts on the field. Though they will blast Arkansas, Nebraska and ASU will be early challenges. And with both Oregon and ND waiting, it could be a tough road. However 3 great recruiting classes can't be ignored, defensive schemes can be taught, but speed can't and USC has speed, other then Georgia and Texas, they maybe the fastest team anyone will face.
Oregon: Here is a case of when good coaching goes a long way. And Mike Bellotti has made all the difference in the world as a school they have only been to 19 bowl games and he has taken them to 8 of them. Again establishing a QB is key. Getting past Oklahoma and Adrian Peterson will be the challenge. Trips to ASU and USC will be enough to cause concern in Nikeville.
The teams on the out looking in:
Ohio State, Florida, Auburn, LouisvilleUnderachieving:
Tennessee, Michigan, Miami Fl.Overachieving:
UTEP, Minnesota,
The Mayor said:
posted on February 4, 2006 12:59 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
TROJANS4LIFE
I think I may have touched a nerve with you with my "spoiled children" cheap shot comment. I apologize; I assumed you had thicker skin than that.
But I think your rant proves my point.
USC is a great school with a tremendous history. A degree from there certainly carries more weight on a CV than one from my University. Sure, maybe I am a little jealous. I didn’t have the work ethic, grades or the money to get into private school. Still, I am proud of the education that I received at the University of Oregon.
I see that you measure success by the trappings of consumerism. A man's worth is certainly not determined by how much money he makes or what kind of car he drives...unless of course it's a Porsche, which is what I drive. Truth be told, any idiot can go out and "lease" a high end vehicle today, big deal.
I am more impressed with the charitable contributions made by your alumni than by what they drive. That is a fact you should be arrogant about!
When it comes to quality education and success in all sports I think you should look to your neighbors to the north. Stanford Won a Record 11th Consecutive Sports Academy Directors' Cup in 2005 and is one step up from USC in academics. Yet, they are no way near as vocal about it.
When it comes to Oregon passing USC for Pac-10 victories I was bring sarcastic but it’s nice to have a goal. But before you discount the Ducks keep in mind that since 1995 USC and Oregon lead the Pac-10 with the same overall winning percentage at 69%.
Oh and by the way, what do USC icon John Wayne and The Mayor have in common? We are fraternity brothers and neither one of us “graduated” from USC.
The Mayor said:
posted on February 4, 2006 1:19 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan,
WR Demetrius Williams was a Senior this year so he's gone.
Losing DL All-American Haloti Ngata is really going to hurt. His mother passed away last month. His mother’s failing health was among the factors that led to his decision to forgo his final year of eligibility at Oregon, along with his responsibility to financially support his three brothers and one sister.
Haloti’s father, Solomone, was killed in a truck accident in December of 2002 at the age of 45.
He should be playing Sundays next year and we wish him all the success. He's earned it.
Gerald said:
posted on February 4, 2006 1:31 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan:
Looks like Keiland Williams signed with LSU after all. Smart move, because he was their highest rated RB signee by far where he would have had serious competition in this USC class. Did you guys get Hazelton? That would make you 2 - 0 against Mark Richt: Hazelton and Stafon Johnson. That is why UGA needs to stop scheduling these Western Kentucky games and go play the PAC - 10 teams on their own turf. Even if they lose the game, it will still help recruiting out there. Tennessee picked up some highly recruited western kids after playing UCLA that time ... guys like Donte Stallworth. I really want SEC schools to go out there and get some of those Cali JUCO WRs.
The Mayor said:
posted on February 4, 2006 1:46 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Notre Dame Fan 444
Appreciate the 5a rating for the Ducks but Dual QB's and losing Ngata on defense will probably leaves us at 8-3 at best.
ASU in Tempe in September for the Ducks, that's usually a disaster for us. OSU in Corvallis, well that's a loss as well.
But we will beat Tommie Trojan's men of Troy only because I say so...so let it be written, so let it be done.
TROJANS4LIFE said:
posted on February 5, 2006 1:28 PM — 72.132.55.173 — link — abuse?
WOW!! I can't believe that you (The Mayor) actually think that the Ducks are going to lose to ASU and Oregon State but are going to come to the L.A. Coliseum and beat the Trojans. That's like me saying the Charlotte Bobcats are are going to lose to the Utah Jazz and Orlando Magic but are going to defeat the Detroit Pistons. WRONG!! It ain't happening. I'm in loss of words because the rationality of your statement is just completely wrong and ridiculous. Well you better put SC in the same list with ASU and Oregon State because when 11/11/06 comes around you guys are going to loss~AGAIN. GO TROJANS!! FIGHT ON!!
True Test said:
posted on February 5, 2006 11:21 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
That game with the Cornhuskers should be a good matchup, even though it's in LA. And I wouldn't count Arkansas a win already. Back in 2003, the Razorbacks lost all of their seniors. This coming season, the freshman from 2004 will be juniors and more experienced. Granted Arkansas is going to have some quarterback issues, but they have some talented players. USC has to replace a QB (which I'm not entirely convinced with John David Booty), RB, and just numerous positions all around. I think USC will probably beat Arkansas. I'm just saying don't count them out.
The Mayor said:
posted on February 5, 2006 11:28 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
T-4LIFE
By the way, what’s all this reference to UCLA as UCLgAy? It's a great school with a great sports tradition. Are you homphobic? That’s very low brow humor that rings of a little jealousy on your part.
And your NBA references are totally lost on me as I don't care for or follow the NBA. I didn't even know that Charlotte lost their NBA team, much less get a new one? And when did the Jazz leave New Orleans?
Your statement "I'm in loss of words (sic) because the rationality of your statement is just completely wrong and ridiculous." T4L, that's why there are "upsets" in sports. There is no rationale for the Ducks beating the Trojans in LA at this point. It's a long shot, but out of emotion, I am going for it.
In closing, if UCLgAy, as you call it, beats USC, what does that make your Trojans…?
Go Ducks...
AzTank said:
posted on February 7, 2006 12:06 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
I think its fair to say that USC is 1-0 against UGA in the recruiting derby. It SC doesn't land Hazelton, he will probably wind up at Penn St. A long shot might be LSU with his high school chum, but I don't think UGA is really in the mix. Good point about Western Kentucky though. I think everyone deserves one gimme (we had Hawaii last year). It puts money into smaller programs and serves as a "pre-season" game. But your other two out of conference games damn well better be against quality teams.
AzTank said:
posted on February 7, 2006 12:35 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Mayor
Easy boy! Let's not get all wrapped around the PC axle (re. UCLgay). I personnaly prefer Fucla as the perjorative term for the hated rival but since they have been so..aweful...lately, I have trouble even mustering enough "give a damn" to use that too often. Too much like picking a fight with a "differently abled"(term used just for Mayor) person!
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on February 7, 2006 7:52 PM — 72.146.22.164 — link — abuse?
As you can see, yet another weak schedule will equal yet another loss in the national championship game against yet another Big 12 opponent.
Why do we always see pac-10 vs. the big xii - both conferences are dominated by one or two teams.
Do you think one team will come out of the SEC, Big Ten, or ACC without a loss - i can promise you that wont happen.
2006 National Championship : USC vs. Texas
AzTank said:
posted on February 8, 2006 12:42 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Bleed Crimson
Waaah! The SEC, ACC and Big 12 all got greedy and expanded to include a championship game. If the PAC 10 had two more teams it would be much more difficult to go undefeated. That extra game is a biatch! But it is centered around GREED. You are reaping what you sowed, so quit whining!
Big 10??? Please. Until this year that is a 2 man show every year...Michigan and or Ohio State. Throw in a Wisconsin or Northwestern every few years and there you have it. Penn St is on it's way back though, so we will see.
The PAC 10 with USC, Oregon, UCLA, ASU, and CAL spent plenty of time in the Top 20. That is HALF the conference. And if Washington gets over the Neuheisal hangover, and U of A thrives under Stoops...it will be THE toughest conference in football!
5 out of 10 PAC 10 school had losing records...
6 out of 12 SEC schools did also QUIT WHINING!Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 8, 2006 1:04 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Gerald:
Yeh, we lost Williams - but, I see another four-star with his same build (not the same speed). Obviously, the other guy is a big back who is good at LSU - so, they got two of them. I think Williams wanted to stay home. He would have been a "for sure" deal at USC. But, I can't blame him for wanting to eat "mama's cookin'". Big loss for USC. That's the power back we needed to replace LenDale White. We didn't bring in one of those guys - so, look for the offense to find other alternatives down near the goal line. We didn't land any players from down south. I think that it is a waste of recruiting energy. You can't blame it on anything - other than the kids just want to stay home and there are plenty of fine programs for them to attend.
I don't know about Hazelton - it's looking real shaky. His pops wants him closer to home at Penn State and that may be best for that kid. We still have many top WR's - so, his loss would not matter too much. I do think that he would have been a tremendous WR at USC though. I don't know if he can proliferate at Penn State like he could have at USC. I'm not counting on him showing up. Therefore, I think that the "mythical recruiting championship" may revert back to Florida. Like you say: it really all depends on what the coaches can do with the talent rather than what everybody guesstimates what the talent is. All that really matters is wins on the football field. We had a decent class by any definition. But, hey, maybe Georgia can get in and take Hazelton - they sure could use a great wideout.Tommie Trojan
Gerald said:
posted on February 9, 2006 10:42 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan:
I think that Ohio State, Auburn, LSU, and even OU and Texas are more likely to get to the title game than anyone from Florida. FSU will never do anything until Bobby Bowden leaves, and Miami will barely get 8 wins next year. Urban Meyer is at least two years away at Florida. As far as your tailback commits go, I suppose Williams could have played next year since he was a prep school guy, but that is no big deal. You all still got 4 good backs, two of them are around 210 lbs. The Reggie Bush - LenDale White thing just worked out the way it did. You don't NEED the "big back small back" thing. You just use what you have. The upshot is that USC is going to be more of a passing team next year anyway like they were Carson Palmer's senior year, and the reason for that will be the loss of the 3 starting linemen more than anything else, although you guys do get Byers back which is good. (Can centers win the Heisman? I am all for it!) As far as Hazelton goes, just be patient. Better to not get the guy at all than to sign him and then have him leave after a year.
Fighting Ibis said:
posted on February 9, 2006 4:47 PM — 69.163.197.196 — link — abuse?
Gerald you act like you follow UM football, but don't know a damn thing! And as for USC and the Pac X, it's easy getting to the big show playing in the weakest conference in the NCAA. Come on, Fresno was a big game last year? They got there asses handed to them by La Tech. You know the team that UM put on there schedule which dropped their strength of schedule.
When you play weak defenses all year "the Pac had six teams ranked over one hundred on defense, Duke had a better Defense than about eight of the Pac teams" it does two things! 1. Your offense gets on the same page. 2. You don't have any injuries.
What about the illegal aided play between Leinart and Bush? As long as no one saw it right? I can't believe they tried to compare that team to the 2001 Canes. That UM team would have stomped the crap out of USC much worse than Texas did. One last thing. Everyone recognizes LSU as the National Champion not USC, regardless of what the media and cry baby Carroll came up with!
Mooka said:
posted on February 10, 2006 7:43 AM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
Bleed Crimson,
I hear that! I would much rather see a NC w/ teams from SEC, ACC, or Big-10 w/ one loss than a team with a weak schedule from Pac-10 and Big-12 get an automatic bid. Though as long as the Pac-10 has a team like last year's USC, I say let them play. They were def worthy for the best of the best match-ups. I would have loved to see LSU stomp 'em in 03.
AzTank said:
posted on February 10, 2006 12:07 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Fighting Ibis
South Florida, Temple and Colorado...Nice out of conference schedule! Florida St which lost to both NC State and Clemson...that was your "tough" out of conference game? Hell, the PAC 10's ASU put up a MUCH better game than the University of Marijauna err Miami did against LSU. 40-3?
Direct comparison 2004--Va Tech..USC beats them on the road and the 'canes lose to them at home.
And with the talent that Miami puts in the NFL every year...3 losses is an embarrassment. It's also ironic that a UM fan is making fun of any conference. When they finally did join a conference it was the big least which was the worst major football conference at the time. So Shaddup!
Fighting Ibis said:
posted on February 11, 2006 5:00 PM — 69.163.197.196 — link — abuse?
Hey AZ Tank, Va Tech played at USC and why didn't USC come to Va. Tech the next year? Because they "USC" wouldn't agree to it! USC has turned down offer after offer to schedule a Home & Home against UM. They'll only play them at USC "just like Va. Tech". Get your facts straight!
South Florida beat Louisville & Colorado was the second best team in the "shitty" Big XII. They can't help it if there is no competition in the "shitty" Big XII?
Everyone in the country knows how weak the Pac X is save your breath! USC had the highest ranked defense at 40+ something in the Pac "garbage"? And again, the only ammo you have is UM got spanked by LSU? Yes we know how much more dominating the teams are in the SEC and ACC, that's what the gripe is all about?Gerald said:
posted on February 12, 2006 2:29 AM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
Fighting Ibis:
Hey, I actually LIKE Miami. I presume that you do as well? So, because I like Miami - or at least acknowledge that a strong Miami is good for college football just is as having USC (or UCLA), Notre Dame, Michigan, Texas, and Ohio State strong helps the game - I want Coker to be fired. Now even Randy Shannon's defenses, which has carried Coker since Dorsey left (not that Dorsey was any good anyway) are breaking down.
Be honest: Miami still has their respect because of what they did from 1984 - 1991. Since 1991, Miami is basically Georgia Tech with better players. Don't think that Miami will always be this great program no matter who is the coach. I am sure that Georgia Tech, Ole Miss, Michigan State, UCLA, SMU, Syracuse, Clemson, and Pitt thought the same.
So, instead of bashing me, you need to be rooting for Miami to go 5 - 6 next year to force Donna Shalala to fire him. I still remember when TULSA, Larry Coker's alma mater, refused to hire him. Remember that, fighting ibis? Your coach is someone that Tulsa refused to hire, and it is looking like they were right not to, as their current coached turned the program around and your coach is running Miami into the ground. I may not know much, but the one thing I do know is Coker has got to go, and I know that were Pete Carroll coaching USC no way they lose to LSU 40 - 3, to FSU 10 - 7, to Georgia Tech by any score, or to UNC last year.
Tommie's Daddy said:
posted on February 12, 2006 12:33 PM — 70.146.49.200 — link — abuse?
USC fans and Gaytor fans shouldn't be allowed to post for a year beacuse they can't back it up.
All season Tommy Trhoejans talk about a "three-peet" but can't beat Texas, or barely beat Fresno St?
Who is Fresno State? Why is that the big game on SC schedule?
As for Florida, I remember LSU kicking the crap outta UF the last couple of years(except the year LSU won the nat. title?) Every year the Gaytors win a couple of games then go on the road and lose to an SEC team every year. This happened while Spurrier was there, Zook, and now Meyer. Under those jerseys are a bunch of sheep.
I think USC and UF would get more respect if they played real teams. Such as SC maybe playing VT in a home-and-home deal. And UF come on! Play Miami you babies! Uf's never had a perfect season. Ever.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 13, 2006 3:09 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Oh Daddy! Maybe your right! Yep - we could not beat Texas - who did? Fresno was a "fill-in" game for the extra alloted game you are allowed when you visit Hawaii. And, who said Fresno was "the Big game". Didn't look like we were much interested in the game. Nevertheless, Fresno was so badly beat up that they went and lost three more games to inferior opponents. We did knock their MLB out for the rest of the season and that had an effect on their defense. We only got to play Virginia Tech at their house - they never showed up out here. What's up with that? Do you think we got scared after beating them by eleven at their crib?
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 13, 2006 3:29 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Gerald:
Here you go. Try this out: www.cfbdatawarehouse.com. This has many interesting stats. Your probably already on to this one.
But, all time conference strength = 1. SEC 2. Big 10 3. Big 12 4. Pac 10 5. ACC1975-1999 it was: 1. Big 12 2. SEC 3. Big 10 4. Big East 5. Pac 10.
1990-1999 it was: 1. Big 12 2. SEC 3. ACC 4. Big 10 5. Pac 10 6. Big East.
So, clearly, according to all of these assembled stats - the SEC is clearly a better conference than the Pac-10 is. The 2000- onward stats have not been compiled as of yet. But, it looks as if over the last (25) years or so that the Big 12 and SEC lead the way. Still, I wish we had a few more head-to-head matchups amongst the stronger teams in all conferences in order to better decide who really is the National Champion.
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 13, 2006 3:41 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
My Bad! USC played Virginia Tech in a game called the BCA Classic which was played in Landover, Maryland. Virginia Tech was officially the "home team" and this game may now be called the "KickOff Classic"? Not sure. Nevertheless, it certainly wan no "home game" for USC.
Tommie Trojan
Gerald said:
posted on February 14, 2006 10:10 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan:
I do not necessarily dispute those statistics. Interesting that the top two conferences - the Big 12 and the SEC - generally feature run oriented styles of play. So now that UCLA and USC are running the ball and UW has a coach that believes in running the ball in Willingham plus you KNOW that Stoops is going to run the ball at Arizona, then perhaps the PAC - 10 will come up. And Cal runs the ball a good bit too, although they need better athletes. And Gary Crowton is going to get Belloti and Oregon back to running the ball as well. Meanwhile, since everyone in the SEC except Auburn wants to be a big time passing school now, I expect the SEC will taper off a bit. But as we all know, the big difference between the PAC - 10 and the SEC is the other side of the ball. Carroll showed that it is possible for a PAC - 10 team to have a top 5 defense. So now, none of the rest of the PAC - 10 teams can claim any excuses. I still remember that Desert Swarm defense that Arizona had that year ... that Tedy Brucshi team that humiliated Miami in a bowl game. It can be done in the PAC - 10; the fans and the ADs have to start caring.
AzTank said:
posted on February 14, 2006 2:55 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Ibis,
When the Hell did a game in Maryland become a USC home game? Are you illiterate? USC scheduled home and home games against Auburn, then Took Va Tech on the ROAD, and now is in a home and home against Arkansas. We can't play everyone every year. Please don't try to tell me that you are going to justify South Florida? Puhleeze. We get a freebie every year (Hawaii)...like a pre-season game...but we don't take 3 of them!
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 14, 2006 10:39 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
You know Gerald - your right again. Interesting that I always liked the Rams when they were in LA and I really liked the offense that Martz put in at St.Louis. But, you couldn't help but notice how the defense wears down when the offense scores too fast. The defense just stays on the field too much. That's why St.Louis had to lose Martz. They would never win again that way. We had the same thing happen here last year with the Trojans. Their average scoring drive for the season probably wasn't over two minutes (I may be exaggerating somewhat) - but, it wasn't very long at all. It killed the young defense. And, that is what happens to teams that score too fast. Hopefully, the offense will slow down somewhat and we can get back to that dominating defense that we had a couple of years back. There certainly is an enormous amount of talent on the defensive side.
Arizona took two big tackles this year - Louis Holmes and Gabe Long. Both were the highest rated JUCO's over the last two years. Long was our guy and commited - but, could not qualify. They are both beasts. I think they are gonna flat out stuff the run. I'm a little worried about that team. They are on the rise. They actually took three highly regarded players away from us - and that don't happen out here. I don't think overall that they can take us though - we'll just go over the top of them. But, there will not be much daylight in the middle. We'll see if Marshawn Lynch can do anything against Arizona.Tommie Trojan
SoCalClips said:
posted on February 14, 2006 11:13 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Does that datahouse.com site consider the Home/Road factor?
For instance, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee are a combined 8-17-5 playing West of the Mississippi, All-Time!
USC is something like 13-16 playing East of the Mississippi since 1980!
UCLA has had 38 Road Games compared to Ohio State's 18, since 1980.Regan said:
posted on February 15, 2006 1:56 AM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
I will say this for Tommie Trojan - during the year, Trojan-haters like me had to deal with a lot of irritation at Southern California's streak and the endless media worship of the 'gods amongst men on the fields of glory' that had permeated the entire sport for over two years and frankly almost kept me from enjoying it.
For all the Trojan fans that usually made it worse with arrogance, Tommie Trojan was pretty darn gracious and reasonable. Now that the bubble has burst and 'hater-backlash' is in full swing, it is more than reasonable for him to back up his team.
I for one am not being as bothered by the 'Trojan worship' for now, so I've eased up. Just wanted to set the record straight on Tommie Trojan, though...
AzTank said:
posted on February 15, 2006 9:48 AM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Regan,
I must admit that all the media hype would have sickened me if I wan't a USC fan. I distinctly remember feeling that way about Miami and Notre Dame when they were on top. It was especially bad since the Irish have their own broadcasting company. So, this year it's wide open and all the big dogs have a chance to grab the spotlight. I have to give the edge to ND, with Quinn coming back and and excellent coaching staff. Spring ball in a month!
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 15, 2006 3:17 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Thanks Regan!
I just like good football - and we were the ones playing it. Then, Texas took that title away. I have liked any great teams. I have always liked Nebraska, Miami, Florida State, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. - etc. Makes not much difference to me who it is who is playing great ball - it is a pleasure to watch great teams play in any sport. I really don't have to hate on anyone's team. I don't like to hear about how great some teams are that are not even on the verge of even being that good though. And, I am wrong quite often. Heck, if I could be perfect, I'd bet every game and win, and retire in one year. But, like many coaches claim: "that's why we play the games". Anything can happen out there. There would always be tough games for any team - if those games were played. Problem is: most of the debate involves teams that will not play each other in a particular year. USC and Texas did meet - and, I got my mouth shut. But, I still got convinced that Texas had a great team. I am not so naive as to think that USC was overrated. I think Texas played the game of their lives to get that one. And, I think the Trojans will just continue to roll. Let's see if I am wrong again. It could happen. But, there are gonna be other great teams emerge next year. I just hope we can beat them when the time comes.Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 15, 2006 8:54 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCalClip:
Where do you draw the line? What about North-South? How bout' all games played south of Nome, Alaska? I think that is the criteria. It looks like it takes everything in. You'd have to figure that it was considering home and away games when it was trying to determine the "strength of schedule" ratings for each team - which it does. So, when ranking conferences - certainly it must be accounting for that. The SEC does have several teams ranked in the Top 25 for winning percentage all-time. I do know this for a fact. Even Mississippi is among that distinguished group - along with Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Tennessee, Georgia and Florida. I'm considering the original ten teams. There are seven of them right there. Now, they've added Arkansas in the last several years. So, the SEC has eight teams in the Top 25 All-Time, I believe. So, they never did better than 50% in Conference play. It's the OOC games that created the high win percentage.
Likewise, the Big 8 had historical powers in Nebraska, Oklahoma and Colorado. When they merged into the Big 12, by taking four teams from the old "SWC", they were able to add Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech. All are storied programs. So, the Big 12 claims six of the top programs all-time. Honestly: the Pac-10 can claim USC, UCLA, Washington, Arizona State and maybe Cal and Stanford as all-time teams. Nevertheless, all those teams are not ranked as high as the combined teams in the SEC.
But, the answer to your question would be to try and find out in the site how those rankings are calculated. There are very many other ratings systems that would come very close to these. If you want to look at others - I'll let you know what they are if you want. But, I would not argue against the idea that maybe most of the SEC's OCC games may have been at home - as they may have been. But, I do not have those facts. Nevertheless, I believe that these particular all-time rankings take all of these things into effect. If you look at the yearly breakdowns - you can clearly see where SOS plays a great part in whom were declared the most powerful teams.Tommie Trojan
SoCalClips said:
posted on February 16, 2006 7:27 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommie T,
Im not to sure you answered my question.
But the point is that the SEC in particular is fluffed up overall (record-wise, etc). The Road/Home factor is one issue (for the Big TEN a bit too), they hide behind their attendence; "well other schools/teams make more money if they play us in our stadiums"
The SEC East's Big-3 are a misserable 8-17-5 west of The Mississippi (OOC).
What happens to those SEC "records" if they traveled more often, the way other Conferences did (namely the PAC).
USC & UCLA are a combined 20-23 east of the Miss since ONLY 1980!!! which was even during USC's dulldrums (roughly 7-5, 1983-2001). What happens to PAC Records if they faced OOC opponents at Home as often as other Conferences did (ei the SEC, BTEN).
If the Road/Home factor is taken into account, then thats fine; "Records" alone dont paint the most accurate picture in this regard.(including Bowl Games the SEC-E3, facing West-teams in Western-Bowls, are 15-28-6 all-time -- as reference, Cal Berkeley ALONE is 22-29 overall on the Road vs East-teams).
auburngtchtedn04 said:
posted on February 17, 2006 12:06 AM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
??????? this is about to make me throw up. who in the crap thinks that USC can go undefeated? i see a 4-5 loss season. i personally hope they lose every game, but maybe that's just because they ripped auburn off in the 04 season. WAR EAGLE
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 17, 2006 12:09 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
War Dayum Eagle:
Hate to break this to you - but some of the "Computer" preseason rankings already have USC as #1 followed by Texas, Notre Dame, Ohio State and all the usual suspects. Auburn is ranked about 9th.
The good news! Rarely does the preseason "computer" favorite end up on top - although USC did in 2004 and Oklahoma did back in 2001? Nevertheless, we've lost two games in the last three years. You'll be lucky if we lose one more - ever!Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 17, 2006 12:53 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCal:
You are correct. There is a majority of the games that have ever been played between Pac-10 and SEC schools that have been played in the south. Now, you might think that the SEC is afraid to play OOC games on the road. Probably not so! It's really all about the green stuff. In the south NASCAR and College Football pack stadiums full - just like a Starbuck's coffee house will out here in "TinselTown". Out here they like "the Arts" and whatever else is "trendy" at the time. But, down south they like fast cars and good football. Now, if a Pac-10 team had they're druthers - they would want to play in the south. It's a "Big Payday" for everybody. Western folk are much too snooty. They might not even show up to see LSU play USC at the Coliseum. But, I guarantee that the Bengals would pack their house - as would any southern team would to see that game. For instance, Washington State is like 0-8 against SEC teams all-time. All the games were played in the south. They probably packed every single game just to watch an SEC team kick the crap out of Wazzou. But, had they played in Pullman - nobody would have made any money. So, most games against SEC teams will be played in the south for business purposes. It's just makes good sense! The average scores all-time in all these games are about a two to three point differential. About what you would expect for a homefield advantage. So, I'm sure that all of the "computer models" have been adapted to take these things into account. Yes, the SEC gets more wins because they play more games at home. But, the Pac-10 would get rewarded for playing a strong SOS on the road. Any good "computer model" would figure these statistics in. But, bottom line: the money is in the south. That is why most Bowl Games are played there. If people would pack the stadium in Buffalo they would have games there in January. Truth is - they wouldn't. We can't even have a Pro Football team here in LA - because they are not sure if LA would tolerate an expansion or existing losing team. Fans out west are very fickle. LA only loves a "winner". Hell, we don't even love are grandparents enough to take care of them in their old age. We stick them off in some nursing home so that we don't have to be bothered with watching them pass away. Pathetic! So, why would people out on the west coast support their teams even when they knew they were gonna lose a game. They wouldn't even show up. Therefore, the for sure money is in the south.
Tommie Trojan
Mooka said:
posted on February 17, 2006 5:32 PM — 138.163.0.41 — link — abuse?
Auburn may have been cheated but not by USC. You should be mad at Oklahoma. I'm sure you can agree USC deserved to be there that year. You know they are just scared to match up a Pac-10 team against a SEC team for the championship. They are scared SEC will stomp all over them and then bring down the integrity of the Championship game by rubbing it in. Something like what LSU did to Miami. Speaking of LSU I remember the year Auburn went undefeated, but LSU should have beat them if it wasn't for an unexplained 'personal foul' on the point after attempt called after the fact that Auburn's kicker missed it. I would have to say LSU got cheated in 04 too, but I have learned to live on and look forward to next year.
BTW: EW, you are funny.
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 17, 2006 8:49 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy Troy - Where are you from? Its "back West"... and "Tinsel Town" is only Hollywood, there isnt any 'tinsel' in South Central or East Los or lots of other blue-collar areas of So Cal.
I made reference to the East/West division in a broad sense... I didnt even post the head-to-head breakdown between the PAC & SEC. I'm not making any definitive claims based on "what ifs", only making it clear that the Home/Road factor is a critical issue in this sort of discussion... and I'M NOT TOO SURE that these computer models account for it. Its something like 28:58, @PAC:@SEC, also 22 "neutral" Bowl matchups (using subjective measures in Bowls: 12 quasi-PAC-Homefields, 3 quasi-SEC-Homefields, 7 neutral). Overall, its about 40 games @ SEC, 61 games @ PAC, 7 neutral sites. That eerily comes to about the PAC vs SEC win/loss Record (39-62-7). Im not saying, but Im saying.I know its about "the green stuff"... THAT is what I SAID: "they hide behind their attendence". CollegeFootball devotion/attendence is predominantly a Piss-Town sorta thing. NYC, Chicago, Philly, The Bay, DC, Dall-Worth, Boston, Houston, *Detroit*, Miami, Atlanta are Major Cities where Major CFB programs dont exsist/never developed/or lack Passionate fanbase; Rutgers? Northwestern, Temple, TCU, SMU? Boston, Maryland, GTech draw about 45-50K... 9-3 Miami drew only 45k this past season! (AnnArbor/Detroit with Michigan is the exeception to the rule). USC drew about Double - drew almost 60K even during the PAUL HACKETT DAYS!!! UCLA, about 60K coming off 6-7 a season going into a 6-6 season recently.
Some of that "Fans [back] west are very fickle" talk is overblown. The L.A. Raiders had better attendence than 12 other teams in 1990, 5 years before they left. L.A. Rams had better attendence than 15 other teams! (comperable stats even 10 years before they left So Cal).
Even my So Cal Clippers have been in the middle of the pack in NBA attendence rankings over the past few years. The Dodgers (which havent won a playoff series in almost 20 years) and the Angles combined drew more fans than the ENTIRE NASCAR CIRCUIT last year!!!Its "back" West.
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 18, 2006 7:27 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Clarification: its been 40 Road* games for the SEC, 61 Road* games for the PAC, 7 neutral* (The PAC's record vs the SEC is eerily similar; 39-62-7).
*accounting for quasi-home/road/neutral Bowl games.Be sure, I'm not protesting the imbalanced Road/Home schedueling, necessarily, only that is should be recognized/accounted for in any discussion about conference comparisons.
How about comparing National Titles... on a team-for-team basis, the PAC in only behind the Big TEN (by some accounts).
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 19, 2006 7:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Ha... Listen (below) to the envy, the delusion, the pompous-ity of these SECers, drunk from sipping on the 'hater-ade'.
Meanwhile... the 2005 SEC "champs" lost to the Big Least. Talking smack about WEAK SCHEDULE ?!? Georgia's SOS was only Rated about 39th! LSU's SOS was Rated 48th!!! Texas & USC (roughly) faced the 12th & 17th Rated SOSes (thats per the Consensus Ratings, not based on 'my opinion' - bcsfootball.org)... pay attention Clowns.
Who is "they" that were scared to matchup USC vs an SEC chump? NOT ONE SELECTION ORG voted Auburn the Champs in 2004! - NCAAsports.com and thats from a list that had two or three Orgs name 11-2 USC the 2002 Champs... one that named Oklahoma the 2003 Champs! Thats how much Aubutah 04 was out of the running.-----
Mooka says: I would much rather see a NC w/ teams from SEC, ACC, or Big-10 w/ one loss than a team with a weak schedule from Pac-10 and Big-12 get an automatic bid. Though as long as the Pac-10 has a team like last year's USC, I say let them play. They were def worthy for the best of the best match-ups. I would have loved to see LSU stomp 'em in 03.auburngtchtedn04 says: this is about to make me throw up. who in the crap thinks that USC can go undefeated? i see a 4-5 loss season. i personally hope they lose every game, but maybe that's just because they ripped auburn off in the 04 season. WAR EAGLE
Mooka says: Auburn may have been cheated but not by USC. You should be mad at Oklahoma... USC deserved to be there... You know they are just scared to match up a Pac-10 team against a SEC team for the championship. They are scared SEC will stomp all over them and then bring down the integrity of the Championship game by rubbing it in. Something like what LSU did to Miami. Speaking of LSU I remember the year Auburn went undefeated, but LSU should have beat them if it wasn't for an unexplained 'personal foul' on the point after attempt called after the fact that Auburn's kicker missed it. I would have to say LSU got cheated in 04 too, but I have learned to live on and look forward to next year.
Gerald said:
posted on February 19, 2006 10:13 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
SoCalClips:
You are being oh so dishonest. Georgia, Florida, Tennessee are NOT the SEC's top 3 historical teams. That you would claim such a ridiculous thing pretty much invalidates any point that you would even try to make. Georgia's history is limited to a few good years with Vince Dooley (some with Herschel Walker, some without) and the 2 SEC titles with Richt. UGA didn't even win a conference title or go to a major bowl game from 1981 until 2002. Florida was considered the most underachieving college football program in the nation until Spurrier, and all Spurrier did was beat up a bad SEC. Spurrier had a losing record to FSU, was owned by Miami, and suffered the biggest national title game humiliation ever: 62 - 24 to Nebraska and it wasn't even that close. Tennessee? Please. They have only won one national title in their history and rarely even win the SEC title. Go learn something about the SEC and then we will talk.
EW said:
posted on February 19, 2006 11:16 PM — 65.125.101.150 — link — abuse?
To add more...
I admit, USC did extremely well in recruiting this year. However, I do feel that USC is going to wane. Bush, and Leinart, IMO were the only players on USC worthy of the hype they got. Bush more than Leinart.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 20, 2006 1:03 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCal:
I'm right here in East LA, bro! And, when they have Starbucks here - you know something has got to be wrong. Grew up in South Central - 110th and Crenshaw. Yeh, pretty familiar with LA. But, my reference is to all of the greater LA area, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties included. Now, you just know that we do have other things to do, right? This ain't a one street down with a picture show and a high school football game to attend. There are just a million other activities all clamouring after your buck. All I'm saying is: this is not a rabid football town like some of the places down south. That's why we don't have to hate every other team when our teams lose a game. Heck, we could just go to the beach or Baja or something.
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 20, 2006 4:51 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Why would you SEC people be mad at any school? It's the BCS you need to be disturbed with. They penalize you too much for one lousy loss, thus costing SEC teams any chance at a National Championship, as the SEC schedule is ordinarily the toughest in the country. They should be "rewarding" quality wins rather than penalizing good teams for losing to other good teams. USC never cheated anyone. Oklahoma never cheated anyone. It's the BCS that can't seem to get it right most of the time. That shoe fits both ways. In 2003 USC could have made the case as being the 2nd best team rather than Oklahoma. Well, all computer polls generally say that LSU had the best team that year, but USC never got the chance to dispel that notion, as they were relegated to have to play in the Rose Bowl against Michigan that year. LSU goes out and hammers Oklahoma and walks away with the NC.
Same exact scenario the next year: As Oklahoma is somehow regarded as #1 and USC goes out and pummels them. Well, Auburn ends up ranked 2nd by almost all computer polls, and never gets the chance to dispel the notion that USC was #1.
So, it is my opinion that USC was robbed in 2003 and Auburn was robbed in 2004. The only difference is: somehow the "Sportswriters" voted for USC #1 in 2003 rather than LSU. I think that it was mostly a show of disrespect for the BCS more than anything else - and they should have done the same thing in 2004 after that pathetic showing that Oklahoma put on against USC. They should have disrespected the BCS again and given Auburn half a title. Maybe the only reason that they didn't - was because USC blew Oklahoma away so BIG TIME that it might have created just too much of a farce. Anyway, the BCS is the problem. At least last year, there wasn't too much of a fuss, as only one team finished unbeaten. But, I don't look for that to happen very often.Tommie Trojan
War dagum Eagle said:
posted on February 20, 2006 7:53 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
USC Trojans 2006 Football Schedule
09/02/06 Arkansas Fayetteville, Ark. LOSE
09/16/06 Nebraska L.A. Coliseum LOSE
09/23/06 Arizona Tucson, Ariz. LOSE
09/30/06 Washington State Pullman, Wash. LOSE
10/07/06 Washington L.A. Coliseum LOSE
10/14/06 Arizona State L.A. Coliseum LOSE
10/28/06 Oregon State Corvallis, Ore. LOSE
11/04/06 Stanford Palo Alto, Calif. LOSE
11/11/06 Oregon L.A. Coliseum LOSE
11/18/06 California L.A. Coliseum LOSE
11/25/06 Notre Dame L.A. Coliseum LOSE
12/02/06 UCLA Pasadena, Calif. LOSE
12/23/06 Alabama Tuscaloosa,AL toilet bowl LOSE
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 20, 2006 9:27 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Two computer polls added to the All-Time Winning Percentage Index create this order of the Top 25 Programs of All-Time:
1. Notre Dame
2. Michigan
3. Alabama
4. Texas
5. Ohio State (Tie)
Oklahoma (Tie)
U.S.C. (Tie)
8. Nebraska
9. Tennessee
10. Penn State
11. Georgia
12. L.S.U.
13. Miami (Fla.)
14. Florida State
15. Auburn
16. Washington
17. Texas A&M
18. Georgia Tech
19. Florida
20. Minnesota
21. U.C.L.A.
22. Arkansas (Tie)
Pittsburgh (Tie)
24. Michigan State
25. ColoradoNotre Dame by virtue of high winning percentage and most National Championships gets the nod - I suppose. Michigan is the leader in winning percentage. Alabama and USC lead in Bowl game winning percentage with Alabama leading in total Bowl Game victories. It's all the usual suspects - but it is interesting to note that the SEC does have seven teams in the Top 25 All-Time. The Big-12 puts three teams in the Top Ten. I'm sure that somebody is gonna gripe and try and point out how this is completely unreasonable. I don't know: looks about right to me.
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 20, 2006 9:46 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
In defense of all of the SEC loyalists who will make this argument and rightly so: Notre Dame did not participate in any Bowl Games for many, many years. Had they done so, their winning percentage would have dropped considerably (as they do not do well in Bowl games historically), and dropping them from the top spot. And, they may not have garnered so many National Championships had they had to play that one last game. Likewise with Michigan, Ohio State and USC - as the Big 10 and old Pac 8 would limit only the Conference Champion to be able to participate in a Bowl game. Basically, USC's high Bowl game winning percentage comes from beating up on Big 10 representatives almost exclusively. Alabama holds a 5-2 edge over USC in the Rose Bowl. Big 12 and SEC teams played many Bowl games over the years, as they were never restricted in the number of teams that could be sent, therefore driving the winning percentages down (which would normally happen when you play one more really good team each year - possibly better than any team you had played previously in that year). Like we've all said before: any statistics can be skewed and this one certainly may be. Let the Molotov cocktails fly!
Tommie Trojan
Mooka said:
posted on February 21, 2006 3:45 PM — 138.163.0.43 — link — abuse?
So Cal Slips,
I'm sorry but if USC's defense couldn't stop only ONE person in the Texas offense what makes you think they could stop WV's QB and RB?
Anyway, we were talking about weak schedules right? Okay, I think USC last year played 2 teams ranked in the top 15. Meanwhile LSU played 5 teams ranked in the top 15 almost all consecutively. Do the math. Once their season started it never ended and they still only lost 2 games and that's including 1 for a SEC Championship. The difference between USC's schedule and LSU's besides the obvious math, is that almost every time they played they were playing another team for position. Sorry, but Pac-10 wasn't nearly that competitive. That's all I'm saying. When a team that goes undefeated after competing through all of those circumstances they def deserve to go to the Championship game (or if they even lose one for that matter). Hence, Auburn in 04. Nothing about hating just plain and simple--bullsh& that you have to admit. I'll take Tommie Trojans advice though, and just beef with BCS. At least he makes sense.
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 21, 2006 7:36 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald says:
SoCalClips You are being oh so dishonest. Georgia, Florida, Tennessee are NOT the SEC's top 3 historical teams.
So Cal Clips -- the thing is I DIDNT SAY THAT THEY WERE! Dont put words in my mouth and then try to discredit me with em. I made EXPLICIT mention that I was refering to the "SEC-East's Big 3"... Bama is 9-9 since 1920 (WofM) LSU ?,
... Tennessee? Please. They have only won one national title in their history and rarely even win the SEC title. Go learn something about the SEC and then we will talk.So Cal Clips: Tennessee has TWO Titles in its history 1951 & 98 (4 total if you count NCF, CFRA, Helms, etc).... You tellin me to learn something? Ha!
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 21, 2006 9:56 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommie-T,
I know So Cal too, from Temecula to Oxnard. But you missed my point...
We're on the same page about So Cal not being "as" rabid... but My contention is that generally speaking, College Football Rabid-ness is a "Piss-Town" sorta thing -- and Not just in 'the south' like you say. Its a rarity in "Major-Cities". Michigan in Detroit/AnnArbor is the exception... and USC & UCLA (and Washington/Seattle to some degree) are caught in the middle. Look at the MAJOR metro areas New York=Rutgers, Chicago=Northwestern/NoIll, Philly=Temple... DC/Boston/Atlanta are major cities w/about 4 million, Maryland/BC/GTech draw about 45-50 thousand and rarely 'sell-out' a season, thats hardly "rabid"... you cant even find a 'major-conf' school in Dallas-FtWorth, Houston or even in "Mid"-major cities like Tampa, San Diego, Denver, St Louis, Cleveland... then there's MIAMI! Located in "the South", 5 Titles in about the past 25 years!, in a Major city/talent Mecca and is not even close to being a rabid College Football town. 9-3 Miami drew 45,000/game this season! (UCLA, coming off a 6-7 season a few yrs ago still drew about 60,000 to a 6-6 season!... during the dismal PAUL HACKETT seasons, USC still drew just under 60,000).
Michigan in Detroit/AnnArbor(5 million) is the only school in a Major City with a "Rabid" fanbase... next largest are minor cities - Columbus/Ohio St and Austin/Texas w/population of about 1.5 million, er Piss-Towns.
Penn State in piss-town College Park Station State, PA draws 100K... why doesnt Pitt or Temple draw that? why didnt a "Penn St" sort-of-program evolve in Pittsburg (2.5 mil) or Philly (7 mil)?
I'm just sayin - that 'rabid' mentality, its a piss-town sorta thing.So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 21, 2006 11:41 PM — 204.62.106.220 — link — abuse?
Mookie, dont be 'sorry' that USC lost... injuries happen to the best of em.
USC faced a revolving-door of Injuries on defense viritually All season long. The Rose Bowl game was no exception (If Im not mistaken, not ONE "Starting" Linebacker actually Started in that game!). The Defensive Team Captian, LB Dallas Sartz, was OUT for the season only 3 games into it.
- Injuries plagued USC's Defense on a Biblical scale:
Chris Barret DE, Cushing LB, Darnell Bing S, Kyle Moore DE, Dallas Sartz LB, Terrell Thomas CB, Will Harris CB (twice), Jeff Schweiger DE, McCurtis DB (twice), Kevin Thomas CB, LaJuan Ramsey LB, Kevin Ellison S, John Walker DB/WR, Keith Rivers LB, Thomas Williams LB... its a credit to Pete Carroll that he kept this team in serious contention for the Championship up until the last few seconds of the season. Particularly when USC faced 9 of the top 30 Offenses in the Country! Its Not likely that USC will face such bad fortune/level of injuries again this coming season (law of averages, historical trends, and fingers crossed). It was a fluke-ish season for USC/Carroll in that respect:
2002 USC = No. 6 Rush Defense (facing #1 SOS)
2003 USC = No. 1 Rush Defense
2004 USC = No. 1 Rush Defense
2005 USC = massive amounts of injuries on DefenseWest Virginia QB and RB?!
come on, Texas/Vince Young were No. 3 in Total Offense... WVU and Pat White/Steve Slaton were 50th...like I said, USC face 9 of the Top 30 Offenses. Ya need some more learnin yet, if yer gonna compare WVU to Texas.So the subjective measure is the "top 15" huh?... not the usual "top 25"?
You cant even get THAT data right!
- Note: I made mention of 2005 SOS not 2003 -
USC faced 4 Top 15 teams (Coaches Poll)... 4 in the Top 16 (AP Poll); LSU faced 4 in the Top 15 (Coaches & AP). If youre some snot-nose kid that counts the Rankings "at the time" dont even bother responding to this! (if youre talking about '03 SOSes; LSU was in the top 20, USC was top 30 overall) If any reference is gonna be made, ya gotta use the Final Rankings... and Not just about the "top whatever" Polls...
Its Not "my opinion", or your opinion... go to the source - www.bcsfootball.org - click, click and you'll find:
2005 Consensus SOS Ratings (roughly)
1 Oklahoma
2 Michigan
3 UNC/Ohio St (tied)
12 Texas
17 USC
48 LSUThis is what Im Talking about, SEC is a lot more HYPE than anything else - SECers dont even know whats what. Based on the ONLY RATINGS THAT PLAY A PART IN THIS! http://www.bcsfootball.org (archives)
2005 Conf Rankings (roughly):
1 B TEN
2 XII
3 ACC
4 PAC
5 SEC
2004 Conf Rankings (roughly):
1 XII
2 PAC
3 ACC
4 SEC
5 Big TEN
... SEC is a lot of hype.
NOT even ONE Selection Orginization chose Auburn!@!... as per the list on the NCAA site itself ncaasports.com. And thats a list that includes orgs that gave Oklahoma a Title in 2003, and a couple that gave 11-2 USC a Title in 2002! Thats how much Auburn didnt 'rate' a Title in 2004, a`la undefeated Utah.Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 22, 2006 12:24 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan says:
Auburn PussyCats 2006 Football schedule:
9/02/06 Washington State - Blown Out 17-75
9/09/06 @ Mississippi St. - Win 7-6
9/16/06 Louisiana State - Win 3-2
9/23/06 Buffalo - Lose 14-42
9/28/06 @ South Carolina - Win 10-7
10/07/06 Arkansas - Win 6-3
10/14/06 Florida - Win 14-10
10/21/06 Tulane - Lose 6-28
10/28/06 @ Mississippi - Win 3-0
11/04/06 Arkansas State - Lose 7-28
11/11/06 Georgia - Win 6-5
11/18/06 @ Alabama - Lose 2-3At the conclusion of the 2006 Regular Season, Auburn will proclaim themselves a stake in the BCS Championship game in part because of their 7-1 Conference record, and the simple fact that they played one of the hardest schedules in the country. They will also point out how weak the Pac-10 defenses are because they scored their highest total all season against a Pac-10 team.
Heck, I say, give em' a shot, after playing such great defense against such great teams - they deserve it!Tommie Trojan
Mooka said:
posted on February 22, 2006 4:42 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
All I heard just now was blah, blah, bunch of excuses, blah, blah. There was never a doubt that USC's defense was garbage. That's not the issue. Look at what Fresno did to them. With that in mind I do think the #50 offense would've trashed USC's defense, or even the #60th, #70th for that matter.
BTW: What makes you say that it doesn't matter what they are ranked when they play them? That's the whole point of the competiveness.
Please don't bring in any BCS results as your arguement. Once I read BCS in your last response I automatically disregarded everything you were trying to say. Also, what's wrong with saying how many teams were in our schedule that was in the top 15 compared to the top 25? Sorry if our level of competion was a bit higher than that of USC's which was the whole point I was trying to make.The only part of your argument I'll give you is this,
"Particularly when USC faced 9 of the top 30 Offenses in the Country!" (SEC could say the same thing if they faced a bunch of 05'USC type defenses)
Everything else was garbage.
Though you were also right when you said I was wrong for saying LSU faced 5 in the top 15...They faced 6 when you count Miami and Georgia. Please don't tell me you think USC had a more competitive schedule. That sounds more like a joke to me.
The Mayor said:
posted on February 22, 2006 5:22 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
War dagum Eagle,
I can't even believe I am responding to your nonsense. Your "predictions" are obviously tongue in cheek and you are just trying to stir things up. Then again I may be wrong, you may be dumber than a bag o' hammers.
Predicting USC to go the entire season without a single win? You're flying solo on that prognostication Eagle. More importantly, how can you predict that USC will lose to Alabama on this blog and then state Alabama will lose to USC on another blog announcing Alabama's schedule? Doesn't one team have to win the game?
(http://www.fanblogs.com/alabama/006409.php)
Lay off the shine there War Golly Sparrow...don't you know "friends don't let friends drink and blog."
War Dagum Eagle said:
posted on February 22, 2006 7:17 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
The Mayor: No, I ain't trying to stir nothin up, and yea, it would be beyond my wildest dreams to see USC lose every game. And if the toilet bowl was real, then i would put my bets on alabama, but since it ain't real, they can both lose. USC thinks they're all great and everythang, when they ain't even won an outright championship in the past 3 years and they were supposedly going for 3 straight! ESPN makes me even madder every time i watch it and all they talk about is USC's wonderful AP poll in 03(LSU would have won that game) and their so-called "outright" national championship in 04(auburn would have also won that game) and all of a sudden they're running for 3 straight? It's all bull crap. In 04 they barely escaped STANFORD! Thanks to a 31-28 4th quarter comeback win, they get to keep their national championship hopes alive....."what a beautiful comeback win for lienart!"-quote ESPN.....then auburn actually plays a close game with rival alabama, and ESPN said that we shouldn't go because we didn't beat them and tennessee(IN THE SEC CHAMPIONSHIP!) bad enough! And if it weren't for bad officials UCLA would have beat USC the day auburn played bama! So yea, i have a good reason to hope USC loses every game. And, i also don't want to offend anybody. Im a christian and don't want to make people mad. WAR EAGLE
So Cal Clipps said:
posted on February 22, 2006 7:41 PM — 204.62.104.216 — link — abuse?
Gerald... the SEC historian,
Not only do you not know that Tennessee has more than one National Title... you say that they "rarely win the SEC title" when in reality, Tennessee has won the 2nd Most SEC Titles in the Conference! Is also 2nd in all-time Winning %.
Georgia is 3rd in SEC Titles & 3rd in all-time Win %.
And in case you missed it, DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH and then try to Discredit Me - Notice I let You tie your own Noose (didnt change your words). And its not like I chose Vandy or Miss State as reference.
Anyway, my point still stands pretty firm using LSU, Auburn, and Bama too.
Rough estimates, correct me if Im wrong (OOC/OOSt; ie excluding Arkansas & Louisianna teams):
LSU is 21-31-5 all-time in the regular season @ West of the Miss... and 2-3 in western Bowls facing West teams; 23-34-5 overall.
Auburn is 5-10-1 all-time @ W of Miss, overall (including vs W teams/W bowls)
Bama is 19-14-3 all-time @ W of Miss, overall (including vs W teams/W Bowls).
Geo/Flor/Tenn are a combined 15-28-6 @ West of the Miss All-Time/Overall (including bowls).
... the one SEC team that has scheduled quite a few Road games west of the Mississippi (lots of @ Rice, @ aTm, @ Texas games across the state border), virtually sits on the banks of the Mississippi! and only has a 40% win-record against em.
... Alabama is the only stand-out in terms of winning %.Listen, to the rational people out there, I'm only Tempering the SEC-Overhype, not trying to Knock the SEC necessarily. The Road/Home factor (travel, homefield, etc) should be accounted for.
War Dagum Eagle said:
posted on February 22, 2006 8:35 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
the only reason i'm mad is because of this:
Alabama has 12 national championships. We have 1 national championship. I would like for auburn to catch up to bama before Jesus comes and takes us all. That's why i get so tore up about one national championship, becaus everyone counts when your trying to catch up to alabama. And 11 national championships is a lot of ground to cover in who knows how much time. WAR EAGLE
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 22, 2006 11:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
To the Moe Rons, Listen, when you talk about "Conferences" you have to realize that the means "Conferences" - not just the "top so-n-so teams" of a confernce, its TOP to BOTTOM, overall - get it?
The Conference Rankings (consensus) for 2005 were Roughly:
1 Big TEN
2 XII
3 ACC
4 PAC
5 SEC
Its not "MY OPINION" or your opinion.. THAT IS WHAT the Ratings are - www.bcsfootball.org
For 2004 the Consensus Ratings were roughly:
1 XII
2 PAC
3 ACC
4 SEC
5 Big TEN
Again, thats SOLELY based on the Consensus Ratings which account for only Wins and Losses - no regional bias, no personal bias, no philosophical bias, etc.Also know that USC faced (roughly) a Top 20 SOS in 2005 (Texas was Top 15, or so)
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 23, 2006 1:26 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCal(NotHipToBeAClip):
Your points on attendance figures are well taken and I'm not going to bother with any disputing of that. All I'm saying is that the south really packs em' in.
I want to clarify two things for the record. There is not the excuse of injury to use for any team at any time. A good quality team should always have depth. All teams suffer many injuries. Let's look at the injuries that USC suffered: none at all on offense and many on defense. Normally this may have been divided. Had it been: the Trojans certainly may not have scored fifty a game. An injury to Leinart, Bush, White, Jarrett or any of the OL might have had dire consequences. So, they were very fortunate on the offensive side of the ball. In fact, it has been that way for about four years now. Now on to the defense. The injuries were mostly to linebackers and cornerbacks. Most were accrued in practice. That's just how USC practice's - just like game conditions. That was a mean OL with some pretty mean runners. But, USC did have depth at those positions. The linebackers that stepped in did a tremendous job as did Josh Pinkard when he took over at corner. The DB's were great after the 1st few games - none of which USC lost. Afterall, they only lost the last game. There was no problem because of injuries. The problem was in the DL where there were no injuries at all. After graduating Patterson, Cody, and Manuel Wright to the NFL - the DT positions were both taken by new players. Cedrick Ellis did a commendable job as a sophomore - but, LaJuan Ramsey did not live up to expectations as a senior. They stopped the run pretty well but could not get any forward push into the QB. This allowed the defense to double team WDE Frosty Rucker. Rucker was not able to get to the QB as fast as he had in the past. WLB Keith Rivers was also able to be picked up on most occasions and couldn't get to the QB either. USC was forced into playing a "prevent" defense for most of the year and not gamble at all on defense. Forward thrust by the DT's on pass plays is enormous. It makes the whole thing go. Without it, QB's could stand in the pocket, and pick USC apart. You can't blame it on the corners or safeties either, as any of the QB's we played along with those WR's that they had, would pick apart any team that couldn't get pressure on them. So, I believe more than anything else, that it was the lack of pressure from the DT position, that caused most of the problems with the USC defense. Fortunetly, there are several players coming to the rescue. Ellis will be a junior this year and will be a fine player. Averill Spicer, Walker Ashley, Fili Moala, Derek Simmons, Butch Lewis and Alex Parsons are all ready to step up. This will be the strength of the team over the next four years. These guys will dominate the line of scrimmage.
Now on to strength of schedule (SOS). This can be the most skewed statistic of all. Let me lay down some examples. Let's say that there are 118 Division I teams. Let's say that LSU plays three OCC games against the 118,117 and 116th ranked teams. Then let's say that they play 84th Mississippi State, 96th Kentucky, 76th Vanderbilt and 54th South Carolina. These are all just hypothetical numbers by the way. But, now they have to play #6 Georgia, #8 Auburn, #11 Alabama and #15 Florida. Adding all numbers together you would get 701. Divide that by eleven games and you might say that LSU's schedule averaged around a 64. Now, let's say USC played OCC games of 84,38,53,and 7th ranked teams. And, in conference, let's say they play #14 UCLA, #10 Oregon, #27 California, #35 Arizona State, #66 Arizona, #72 Wazzou, #65 Stanford and #58 Oregon State. All numbers would add up to 529. Divided by twelve would give you about a 44. Now USC plays a much tougher schedule than LSU, right? Wrong! When great teams play lesser teams - wins can almost always be assumed. #27 California should stand no chance against a #1 USC. In fact, you might sat that only Notre Dame, Oregon and UCLA would have any chance. And, as we know now, only Notre Dame was able to give USC any test. LSU on the other hand, would have to play against four teams ranked in the Top 15, with three of those teams being ranked very high and able to play with any team almost anytime. Therefore, in my mind, only quality opponents need to apply when it comes to ranking SOS. All other games are gimme games for any of the great teams.
To be quite honest: it isn't gonna make any difference whatsoever if LSU plays Louisiana-Monroe or Kansas. Both teams are going to lose. LSU will be able to put their underclassmen in earlier and get them more game experience - that's all. Now, since the BCS computer rankings allow for average margin of victory, USC will have to leave their starting players on the field longer to get to whatever that level of win needs to be (since, overall they play tougher teams). But, the risk of injury does go up under this scenario. It has kept their rankings high and they have suffered alot of injuries. The SEC stratedy might just be to limit the number of minutes on the field of it's starting players. Therefore, the real weak competion of some teams, would give them ample opportunity to play their backups and get them game experience. The point is: like anything else SOS can be deceiving. Pat Hill of Fresno State always says, "That's why we play the games". Nothing can be proved one way or another until two teams square off.Tommie Trojan
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on February 23, 2006 5:01 PM — 72.146.23.211 — link — abuse?
It is likely that War Dagum Eagle is dumber than a bag of hammers because he roots for the Alabama Tech Tigers/War Eagles (by the way what the hell is a "war" eagle).
In response to the rankings of best teams of all time::
Alabama - 12 national championships
Notre Dame/Michigan - 11 national championshipsThe only reason Alabama cant claim they have the most is because Princeton or some other ivy league school does (i think they have like 19 or so) but they dont really count so id say
1. Alabama
2. Michigan
3. Notre Dame
Even though i like Notre Dame better than Michigan, Michigan has been consistently good since college football began.Also, to rank the rubes over Georgia Tech, and Ole Miss is complete ludacris.
Auburn - 1 national championship in 109 seasons
- 6 SEC championships in 109 seasonsGeorgia Tech - 4 national championships
- 5 SEC championships (thats right, they havent been in the SEC in 50-somethin years)Ole Miss - 3 national championships
- 6 SEC championshipsThat should shut those Aubies up. Go back to your shantytowns and dont forget to pay your taxes to ALABAMA.
Dan said:
posted on February 23, 2006 6:55 PM — 66.71.94.242 — link — abuse?
Clips,
I vowed not to argue football until August, but I have given in, as temptation has arisen. Besides which, this isn't even really football we're arguing. In any case, calling State College, PA a "piss-town" is a stretch, and an insult to one of the finest places on earth. State College is a beaut of a little town nestled into the central PA mountains - maybe a "piss-town" by SoCal standards, but consider that we don't lead the nation in air pollution while simultaneously touting our "progressive" west coast environmental perspective (rather, we are one of only three universities in the country on the EPA's top-25 list of green energy users - San Diego made the list, but certainly not LA), we don't see murders daily like LA despite our 100,000+ population when school is in session (as a matter of fact, a murder tragically occurred here this past weekend, and was the first in my three years here), but we DO certainly accomplish our ultimate goal, which is to actualize our educational potential, and do so very well. Forgive "piss-town" state college for being a mecca of education, beautiful scenery, and college athletics, rather than such fine elements of modern society as the Oakland Raiders, pavement as far as the eye can see, crime, and pollution.
In actuality, the reason that Penn State draws 107,000 on average (plus the thousands more who just come for the tailgating) on a football weekend probably has more to do with the fact that this is a great university with great character and a great football team. Does Pitt have the largest alumni association in the United States? No, Penn State does. Logically, then, one might assume that more alumni would come to see the Lions play football than the Panthers. That's not to mention the fact that the culture in cities such as Philadelphia favor college basketball over college football (and I would take a Big Five basketball game over anything having to do with Los Angeles any day). In any case, the fact remains that Penn State's fan base has nothing to do with State College being a "piss-town" (do you really think all 100,000+ fans walk to Beaver Stadium from downtown State College?), but has to do with the fact that thousands of people in Pennsylvania and all over the country have spent four years here and come to love the University and the town for all of the class and charm that will never in a million years characterize such a "wonderful" metropolis as Los Angeles. Keep your pretentious attitude in check.
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 23, 2006 10:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mookie,
Dont lie to yourself.
... and if your not, then dont be so dopey.
Tennessee was at one point Ranked No. 3 Dummy! (excuse the explitive). Theyre a 5-6 team! Of Course you DONT use "at the time" Rankings... Fresno St was No. 15 at the time they faced USC, they ended up 8-5!... ar ya gettin it?We are NOT gonna get into that daisy-chain of Wackiness; "F State put up 42 on USC, therefore..." Cause it'll never end... Georgia squeeked by Arkansas 23-20... West Virginia beat Geo 38-35... USC beat Arkansas 70-17.
I'm not the one making up Hypotheticals here!
USC vs West Virginia?!? Come on Bro... the onus is on you to make a credible arguement since Youre the one making a 'claim'. Remember, nothing is Definitive! (F State = 6th Scoring Offense, 29th Tot O, vs a 84th Rated SOS, roughly; West V = 31st Scr O, 50th Tot O, vs a 61th Rated SOS, roughly - SOSes are `per the consenesus (4 of 6) Ratings that post SOS rankings... which leads me to...)The MAJOR issue that people/media/fans have with the BCS is that it only allows TWO teams to play for the Title - meaning, its Not a Playoff system - the Rating/Ranking of the teams is not the major issue (its been tweeked enough). You only have to look to NCAA Basketball to realize it. The Ranking/Seeding process is done behind CLOSED DOORS by a Committee and the RPI formula isnt even made Public! Thats a lot more secretive/sinister Ranking process than the BCS; Polls & Ratings (which are public knowlege, 5 of the 6 ratings explicitly post their formula). But no one has a major problem with the Seeding/Ranking of teams in NCAA Basketball, because there's a Playoff to settle things. Now imagine if only the Top Two teams in Basketball were allowed to play for the Title... where the two teams are chosen behind Closed Doors by some committe using that mysterious/unknown RPI formula. The BCS Ratings/Rankings are Not the Major issue with the overall BCS system, theyre as Legit as anything. 5 of the 6 Ratings account for ONLY WINS AND LOSSES! Theres no regional bias, no personal bias, no "tradition" is taken into account, the name "Notre Dame" doesNT carry any more weight than "Wyoming" does, etc. Wins and Losses, upon Wins and Losses, upon Wins and Losses etc, thats it - www.bcsfootball.org (dont allow the "No-Playoff" aspect of the system to cloud the issue; the "ratings" are credible).
AzTank said:
posted on February 24, 2006 9:31 AM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Mooka,
SoCal is right when he says to use the final poll standings to determine how many teams you faced in the top 15...or 25 whatever. It was just a few years ago when USC played Auburn..the concensus #1 team in the land and whooped that a$$. As we all know now..they were overrated (as are many teams earlier in the season). By the end of the season, the polls are their most accurate.
mooka said:
posted on February 24, 2006 11:31 AM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
AZ, So Cal Slips,
I guess there is no way to explain to you guys what it means to have a competitive schedule. Ya'll keep claiming to face all these great offenses but I'm claiming great all around programs. That means offense and defense. Fact of the matter is you could still count up the end of the season rankings and find LSU still played a much tougher schedule. I don't care what BCS says. I will give up trying to explain to you the whole, "Competitive schedule factor."
None of this really matters anyway. We all know the only way to find out who is better is to match them up. Let's just keep our fingures crossed at the possibilities of meeting USC in either a Championship game, or regular season game. What ever comes first.
I will go back to my business now, but just know (So all SoCAL fans could understand)- Estoy watchando atte.So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on February 24, 2006 3:08 PM — 204.62.104.216 — link — abuse?
Tommie T,
"The South really pack em in"... Yeah, in Piss-Towns (no offense to anyone). Like Ive said, Rabid CFB fanbases in "Major" Metropolitan areas (except Detroit/AnnArbor) dont exist even in "the South" Miami/MiamiU, Atlanta/GTech, quasi-South-DC/Maryland, DallasFtW/TCU;SMU;UNT, Houston/Rice;Houston, Tampa/SoFlo.
It'd be great to have sell-outs every game, but that "rabid" mentality in CFB is generally a Small-town sorta thing - not restricted to the West Coast, South, etc... its NOT just about having ~the beach~ at your backyard, or havin ~so many other things to do~ no, its a Mentality.
Anyway, the Main point of that tangent-discussion is only that the Home/Road factor should be accounted for when comparing/rating Teams, Conferences, etc (Historic SEC vs PAC - SEC played about 28 on the Road and 58 at Home; 22 others were Bowl matchups).Bleed Crimson said:
posted on February 24, 2006 3:38 PM — 72.146.23.211 — link — abuse?
BCS SCREWS UP THE GAME SOOOO MUCH!!!
Nobody can tell true strength of schedule no matter how many computers you have. Nobody can tell conference strength no matter what BCS bullshit says. Just use your common sense.
Does anybody really honestly think that any team in the PAC-10 can stand up to Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, and Auburn besides USC...FORGET IT!!! Nobody can!!! look what happened when Fresno State played Georgia and theyre like yalls 3rd best team in the pac-10.
But the Pac-10 "is the toughest conference in football."
DOES ANYONE NOT SEE THE PATTERN::
USC and Oklahoma - 2003 - undefeated
USC and Oklahoma - 2004 - undefeated
USC and Texas - 2005 - undefeatedcan anyone take a wild guess about 2006!?!?!?!?
USC and Texas - 2006 - undefeated
combined with high preseason rankings (which they most certainly will have) USC and Texas will rematch in this seasons NC game.Are USC and whoever wins the Red River Shootout constantly the best teams year after year?? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Do they always have the best records?? ABSOLUTELY. But as long as they give us a thrilling National Championship game, nobody seems to notice. To be honest, I dont see USC losing a regular season game ever again so long as theyre in the SAC-10. So then, you ask yourself this question:: what can stop a college team from winning year after year?? tougher schedules and/or probation. And also, you would have to be a complete biased fool to believe that the SEC was the worst conference in football over the last 2 years. I dont care how good your team is, you wont look nearly as good in the SEC. and appearances are all the BCS cares about.
Just about everyone can agree that the SEC fans are the most loyal and care the most about football. We have the biggest stadiums, the best attendence, the most sales of merchandise!!! What does that mean?? MORE MONEY!!!
best fans = more money
more money = best staff + best facilities = more attention from top recruits = better teams = BETTER PROGRAMS!!!Can you think of one team that has a stadium that seats over 80,000, and sells out every game that has a bad team?? NO!!!!! But for some reason, you cant get that through your thick skulls. I respect anyone that cares enough about football to post on this website. But face it USC fans!!! look around you... you are the only people from your conference that give a damn. Down south, football is life, so by nature, we are always going to have the best football teams!!! The sooner you understand that, the sooner you will agree that THE SEC IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE THE BEST CONFERENCE IN FOOTBALL!!! AND YOU CAN CLOSE YOUR LAPTOPS ON THAT ONE.
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on February 24, 2006 5:56 PM — 204.62.104.216 — link — abuse?
There are no Excuses,
USC lost to Texas. Its was an awesome game, heartbreaking outcome.
Of course Injuries happen, thats part of the dynamic of CFB... as is scheduling, coaching, luck, etc (if Im not mistaken... Oklahoma won the Title in 2000 in part because they suffered ZERO missed games by a Starter due-to-Injury for the entire team, all season). Now having acknowleged that dynamic, USC's "platoon" of injuries on Defense was flukish; reached a freakish-level this past season. It wasnt just 4 or 5 players missing a few games... 3rd String WRs had to revert to DBs, true freshmen LBs were forced to remove their Red-Shirt status to fill the roster on the 1st-Team!, 5'7" 160 pound Korean twin brothers Ting & Ting often played significant 4th Quarter minutes (in for critical plays vs Notre Dame, Texas).
Tommie T, USC did have depth. Thru the injury plagued season they were in contention for the National Title even in the final seconds of the Season... and it took an Epic feat from an Outstanding team to beat em.
I understand that ya gotta acknowledge USC had bad fortune/massive injuries... that you could only wonder how Lofa Tatupu woulda handled Vince Young if he hadnt left early to the FtheNFL, but accept the fact that he did... and that ya gotta get past pine-ing over critical missed plays "Reggie, Reggie why'd you pitch that ball... Matt just call Time-Out, set up the FG, dont try the sneak from there!... Ting! Catch it, Ting! Why'd you bat the ball down Ting, you catch that one & the game's over, that interception woulda Made your career..."
Its a process.
Like I said to whoever it was, Dont be sorry that USC lost, injuries happen to the best of em.
There are no Excuses here. Texas beat USC.... About calling out the USC D-Line, losing two All-Americans DLs & a third Stud DL is tough to replace, and youre right in that getting pressure on the QB by the DL is critical to the effectiveness of the DBs. But USC also lost two All-American LINEBACKERS... a drop-off of USC's defensive production was Expected for the 2005 season - the massive amounts of Key injuries only made matters Worse. And it began with losing the team's most veteran returning Linebacker (Team Captian) early in the season... these youngster DBs & LBs backups were also a part of the revolving-door-of-injuries on top of being largely inexperienced.
One of the Ting brothers (if not both) was in on the last drive of the Texas game (ND game, etc) and had a critical missed-INT that would clinched the Win for USC - when your 3rd string Safety is playing Corner in clutch-time, you have to acknowledge that injuries to DBs played as much a part as the D-Line's relative ineffectiveness (not taking away from the Texas O-Line, theyre an elite crew).The D-Line gonna be the strength of the team? Could be... but take a second look at the crew of LBs!
Dallas Sartz - Team Captian, returning for 5th Yr
Oscar Lua - 5th yr Sr, returning Starter
... and about SEVEN other LBs that were 5-Star-Rated Recruits! There's so much Elite LB Talent that 5-Star-JUCO Sr, Powdrell has been moved from LB to Full Back! and the No.4 rated MLB of 2006, Allen Bradford, has to be stashed away on the team's Srong Safety depth chart.
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 25, 2006 7:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Delusional Bama Fans,
12 Titles?! Ha!
Youre fortunate that the embarassing 1973 and 1964 phoney Titles arent Revoked.
1973 Disputed Title is probably the MOST Egregious of them all. Alabama LOST heads-up to Undefeated Notre Dame in the Sugar!!! but still ~claims~ a "Title" essentially due to a clerical/bureacatic techinicality - the Coaches Poll didnt account for the teams' LAST GAME of the SEASON! 1964 was somewhat of a similar situation. Bama be happy with 3rd behind ND and USC.So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 25, 2006 8:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T, SOS
Youre right, there is a lot of ambiguity in SOS ratings. But a few quick example to refute your theory... # 27 Cal should have no shot at USC?!? your nuts.
14-0 Ohio State! National Champs.
23-19 vs Cincinnati (7-7 from CUSA!)
23-16 in OVERTIME vs 5-7 Illinios.
10-6 vs 6-Loss Purdue
19-14 vs 6-Loss Wiscy
... there are others.Btw, There are 119 teams (FIU & FAU were provisional).
golobos said:
posted on February 26, 2006 12:48 PM — 65.19.25.182 — link — abuse?
Mooka:
Are you kidding, the 70th ranked offense would trash SC's D?! What happened when SC played UCLA, they were averaging like 40 PPG and what happened to them? SC won 66-19 and 13 of UCLA's point were two meaningless TDs in the fourth quarter.
Duckman said:
posted on February 27, 2006 6:25 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Bleed Crimpson,
I love your passion. It is completely bias and un-objective but I love your passion. I wont disagree with the attendance stats. They are correct. But you state that we should use our common since. Common sense would suggest taking a look at what games have been played on the field between Pac-10 and SEC teams. Fact is that SEC did not show any kind of dominance over the PAC-10 last year. ASU (PAC-10’fifth best team)came very close to beating LSU (second best team in the SEC). How is that possible if the SEC is so dominant? Shouldn’t they have blown ASU out? I am sure you will say something like “They just got over a hurricane”. They sure got over it fast after that week. Next up we have the USC vs. Arkansas game. Now before you start typing about what a mismatch that was I will save you the time and agree with you. However, no other team in the SEC beat Arkansas that bad. The only credible evidence is games played. Surly you are not gong to suggest that you can tell who is going to win just by watching them play other teams. If that were true then you would be the richest gambler in the world. So unless you have a crystal ball that I don’t know about then the only credible evidence is in games plaid. In that category there is no dominance. You can say it as loud and as many times as you want but fact is that the SEC has not SHOWN that they are no better or worse then any other major conference. The problem is that conference strength is so hard to judge because of how few games are played between them. EVERY conference needs to stop scheduling cupcakes and give us the games we want to see. Its time you learned about a thing called humility and learned to enjoy good football any wear it is played!
P.S.GO DUCKS!!!
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 27, 2006 12:32 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCalClip:
You've made my point. And, I know all about all the depth on defense at SC. Sartz will not be getting his job back - Cushing basically is a much more dominating player. He had a great year for a freshman. There is talk of switching to the 3-4 in order to take advantage of those LB's speed. Although the LB's are young - they are all fantastic. Lua will be hardpressed to start over Rey-Rey also. By the way, Tatupu would have never caught Vince Young. Maybe Lawrence Taylor could have slowed him down - but, I doubt if any other linebacker who ever lived could have caught a QB with 4.3 speed. That is just too darn fast. The DT's are still way too young. When lineman are young, they need a couple of years of weight training to bulk up, before they are ever put out onto that field to be embarrassed. Those people on these lines are tremendously strong people. The young LB's were up to speed and strength and ready to play. MLB Luther Brown was not - he'll be redshirted. But, the young DT's were not big enough and strong enough. Spicer was redshirted and will be bulked up. Kyle Moore played some DE - but that does not take the physical strength of the DT's. Defensive Tackle is the hardest position to fill on any team. That is my understanding - even tougher than QB! The DB's were mostly healthy all year. They did lose Terrell Thomas early which may have made a difference, but by the time he would have ever tackled Young, Vince would have already been into the secondary. No, I still insist, that it was a weakness from the DT position (more than anything else) that prevented USC from getting more pressure on Vince Young. There was nobody there to just grab him and throw him down. A couple of those might have made the difference. But, remember: that was a great Texas OL also. They were very good at creating gaps in the oncoming pass rush. They also sent the RB and TE into the secondary on each play. Two LB's had to drop off and cover these guys. One LB cannot catch Vince Young once he broke containment. That's the point: he was never contained. Had he been - it would have been a whole different story. Fortunately, that DL will be better this year. Now, the offense loses virtually eight starters - just like the defense did last year. And, the defense will lose five more starters. So, alot of young people are gonna have to step up in a hurry. And, with the very young secondary, that DL better get some tremendous pressure on the QB.
Tommie Trojan
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on February 27, 2006 6:03 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Cushing? The guys talented but Not at All as effective as he shoulda/coulda been (fought thru injury too), the kid was lost a lot of times, including vs Texas.
Kaluka Maiava 9assisted+12solo tackles in 12 Games
Oscar Lua 28+38 tackles in 12 games
Ray Maualuga 11+26 in 12
Brian Cushing 9+14 in 8 games (only 1 vs Texas, assted)
Dallas Sartz 1+8 in 2 games.Cushing wasnt stellar.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 27, 2006 9:49 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCal:
You just like to argue - don't you? Here is a clue: nobody ran the ball against USC - only Vince Young. Everybody else was trailing by about forty points most of the time. And, anybody who wasn't was throwing it downfield. Why would you use the low tackle totals of the LB's to prove my point? I said that USC was getting passed on, not run on, although Vince Young finally did break loose. Nobody else really did. It is not surprising at all that nobody on the USC Linebacking core had very many tackles. I'll bet you'll find that Bing and Ware led the team in tackles and that should say it all. Don't knock Cushing because they would not run over there. And, Vince Young is not the litmus test for how good a linebacker might be. Hell, he might just run right by A.J. Hawk (and probably did). Would that mean that Hawk isn't very good? Your use of tackling stats for USC linebackers is absurd - as nobody, except for Young, ever tried to really run the ball. Quinn, Keller, Clemens, Olsen, the guy at Hawaii, Pinegar at Fresno all threw the ball. Two teams that ran the ball for the most part and were very good at it, Arkansas and California, were totally stuffed. And, that was the end of that. Maurice Drew got nothing. Nobody got nothing on the ground except for Young. So, I think the linebackers did just fine. I said that the DT's were not getting enough thrust into the QB in order to put more pressure on the pocket. So, how do you get that Cushing is no good? I understand that Cushing will start. What does that mean to you? Sartz wanted to go and try to play safety - which he still may do. But, maybe Bradford will instead. All I know is that Cushing will be the starter and a future All-American along with Rivers and all the other linebackers. What is the argument about? If you claim to have knowledge of the game - understand what was the difference between 2004 and 2005. Patterson and Cody and Tatupu were all gone and that left the middle somewhat soft. The offense had lost nobody and set all kinds of records in the process. The problem was on the defensive line - period! Kenechi Udeze was lost the year prior as an underclassman. So, the 2003 DL was really special. Nevertheless, the defense will be on the rise this year - and the offense will probably sputter early sometimes. At least more than they have been lately. In fact, I can't really remember the last time the offense really sputtered. DEFENSE! DEFENSE! DEFENSE! FIGHT ON!
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on February 28, 2006 11:59 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCal:
Why would you use the weakest National Champion of the last twenty years to make an argument that a #27 ranked team should put up a fight against a Top team? I have no idea how that Ohio State team was able to beat Miami. But, I do think they were probably the weakest NC for awhile now.
I was referring to very powerful #1 rated teams. Not good teams that somehow didn't lose. You know: the kind of teams that will beat you by as many as sixty points. Ohio State was not in that catagory. Oh, maybe once in about fifty games or so, some team ranked between 20-30, might knock off a Top Five team. But, that is rare. Usually it's gonna take at least another Top Twenty team to even make it any kind of a game. And, if it's a true Top Five power, then that won't even matter much. Hence, USC destroys Oregon and UCLA - both finished in the Top Fifteen. Yes, California beat USC a few years back and almost got another one. Yes, UCLA came close in 2004 - but did not pull it off. For one of these good teams to ever come close to beating a great team, the great team has to have a bad day, and the good team has to have a great game. Therefore, even though Ohio State was nowhere near as good as that Miami team, they somehow got the win. That normally does not happen. Besides, that Ohio State team was at least Top Five. But, any other team in the Nation would have probably got blown out by Miami on that day - regardless of how poorly they may have played. That team had a (35 game) win streak at the time. That Ohio State team was very lucky to win that game.Tommie Trojan
Tommy Cushing said:
posted on February 28, 2006 8:04 PM — 204.62.104.213 — link — abuse?
Tommy Cushing,
What Im saying is that Cushing wasnt a 'standout' this season... Rey Maualuga is an assasin (granite skull), Keith Rivers seems to be the quickest/fastest guy in that crew (stealthy), and Sartz (and Lua?) is a savvy veteran & Team Captian (versatile, youre right; DB/LB/TE). Hey, if Cushing ends up Starting that's great - Im not gonna question Pete Carroll; let em compete for the job. But like I said, Cushing wasnt "stellar" (never said he wasnt good).The D-Line WAS a significant issue, BUT YOU CANT IGNORE the personnel losses at LB (or the overall array of Injuries on D) when discussing USC's 2005 Defense. Its not as simple as "The problem was on the defensive line - period!"
The D-Line wasnt the only unit Hit, coming into 05, USC lost FOUR All-Americans from the front-7 (relatively speaking, we sorta exepected a drop-off there), remember also that Matt Grootegoed was a "Consensus 1st Team" AA in 04!... then theirs the loss of Team Captian Dallas Sartz, most veteran LB, only two games into the season ...we might be getting too deep "into the weeds" here but, pressure on the QB also came from blitzing DBs (Carroll's brand of opportunistic D), not in the form of a large amounts of 'sacks' necessarily, but QB-hurry-ups, creating caos, etc... the injuries to DB depth this season, played a role.And beyond All that, USC faced a particularly high-quality group of QBs this past season: Quinn, Clemens, Olson, Keller, Young, Pinegar, etc...
USC opponents (bowl-caliber):
Notre Dame - was 5th in Pass Eff Off, and only 55th in Rushing Off
ASU - 2nd, 58th
UCLA - 4th, 45th
Oreg - 24th, 74th
F State - 17th, 41st
Texas - 1st, 2nd
Cal - 56th, 9thOverall, USC's Pass Defense faced 4 of the Top 5 Pass Efficiency Offenses in the Country! 7 of the Top 25... wereas USC's Rush D faced 4 of the Top 15 Rushing Offenses, 7 of the Top 55.
USC ended up ranked 31st in Rush D, 42nd PassEff D... You can Not ignore the the inexperience at LB, nor the revolving-door of injuries overall.Where's the "arguement"?
On a sidenote, Id personally like to see Sartz, Maualuga & Rivers play the most significant minutes at LB; they give you leadership, toughness & speed... Lua, Cushing, Williams would be fine backups. Cant wait to see Perez at SS.
So Cal Clips said:
posted on February 28, 2006 10:28 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mookie,
The ENTIRE SEC is PERENNIALLY OVER-RATED.
Over-"Ranked" is a more appropriate term. Listen dopey, you dont get any extra credit rating points because ya drew more attendance. 'History/Tradition' doesnt magically convert a Loss into a Win. The SEC thinks of itself as the "N.Y. Yankees" of college football Conferences... they think they're THAT dominant. Its More HYPE than Reality.
You do know the difference between Lack of Parity w/in a Conference... and... relative Conference Strength right?
The fact that the SEC lacked parity doesnt improve (or hurt) its relative Strength.
The SEC had a cluster of good teams up at the top and a cluster of horrible teams down at the bottom... other conferences (BTEN, PAC, ACC) had their teams more EVENLY spread, sort-a-speak.
THAT doesnt determine Conference Rankings!The mis-guided logic of looking at the "amount of" teams ranking the Top So-n-so Poll doesnt determine a "CONFERENCE's" Strength (Conference, meaning Top to BOTTOM).
ei, the Big TEN had 3 teams in the "Top 25" but were RATED the No.1 Conference for 2005.
the SEC had 5, but RATED the No. 5 Conference for 2005 (WORST Record among 5 major conference!)
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 1, 2006 8:26 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SC Clip:
Good post. I can go with all of that. I think Sartz ought to start as the senior player also - as he is a great LB also. Fortunately, we have no problems at LB and Bradford will probably end up there also. As you say, Perez is gonna be a big hitter and Pinkard and Harris will probably be switched backed to safety, and with Mays coming in and playing safety - we'll have a tremendous secondary real soon.
There were many tangibles on the defensive meltdown in 2005. Don't forget that we lost Coach "O" to Ol' Miss and lost eight defensive starters from the previous year. That coupled with some of the injuries certainly caused some problems. I'm not saying that none of the injuries had an effect - as I know they did. Certainly, we probably would have liked to have Dallas Sartz and Terrell Thomas for the whole year. But, I don't think is was as big of a loss as losing Cody, Patterson and Wright to the NFL - along with losing Coach Orgeron. Everywhere that Orgeron has coached at (Miami, USC and now Mississippi) - the DL has always overwhelmed the oppositions OL. I'm just a "pocket guy". I believe, like people in the NFL do, that the QB has got to be able to stand in the pocket and make his reads. When a QB has to take off running, normally at that point, he is not gonna be able to look down field and get the whole picture - as he is currently running for his life. That being said: Leinart is the classic example of what a good QB can do when he gets to stand there all dayum day long. On the other side of the ball: if you can break down that OL, you can dismantle whatever was gonna be run, and get after the QB. The linebackers usually cleanup after the DL has disrupted the play. But, I remember the great DL's that Orgeron coached at Miami along with recent USC DL's, and the common thread amongst those units was the way that they all completely destroyed the offensive line. This allowed all LB's to play tremendous football (if they were fast enough to get to the play they could cleanup). So, I watch all those QB's that you mentioned just sit back there and pick us apart. Oh yeah, I saw Buchanon get turned around early, but after Pinkard took over at corner - I saw no problems in the secondary.
Again my theory always involves "the pocket". Vince Young should never have gotten thru a wall of defensive linemen. Normally, you might want a QB out there running around. That is a good time to knock him out of the game. But, Mr. Young, was the exception to my rule. Not only did he get outside the pocket or break containment by just darting between the oncoming tackles - he was able to not take any good direct hits as great runners somehow are able to do. If USC could have kept this guy inside a collapsing pocket, and forced him to throw the ball under pressure, then they would have faired much better. But, alas, they could not contain Vince Young.
We know that the defense did have some problems last year. Ohio State only surrendered around 24 points to Texas - yet we gave up 50. Fresno State was also able to rack up 41. We did come back to thoroughly dominate UCLA - but should have faired better against Texas. The scheme for containing Young, more than anything else, is what did not work. I don't think having Thomas and Sartz in there would have made much difference - as Sartz wasn't ever the QB blitzer. Now, if Sartz could have kept that TE from Texas from catching more balls - that would have been big. USC was only one play, here or there, from winning that game. One play. So, I have no arguments with much of what has been clarified: I just know that the DL has to put way more pressure on opposing QB's in this coming year. If they can do that, then regardless of what the offense (losing seven starters) does, then Troy should be able to compete for another National Championship in 2006. We are probably not gonna average fifty points agin this year - so the defense is gonna have to step up and start holding teams down to the mid-teens in points allowed.Tommie Trojan
Mooka said:
posted on March 1, 2006 11:17 AM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
So Cal Slips,
SEC teams everyone respects:
LSU
Alabama
Auburn
Tennessee
Florida
Georgia
and sometimes South Carolina
Pac-10 teams everyone respects:USC
sometimes Oregon
sometimes UCLA
....Don't be mad be/c your conference is crap, dopey.
If you want real competition bring it on in the SEC to a team at least a little bit better than Arkansas.So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 1, 2006 8:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T,You say I made the arguement for you regarding USC's D-Line Inexperence/LB,DB Injury issue (I still dont understand how)... but are YOU now making MY arguement for ME?
You say that a 27th ranked team hypothetical team should "stand no chance" against the No. 1 team... but YOU then bring up 2003 (8-6) Cal Berkeley which not only stood a "chance" but outright BEAT No. 1* USC! There was also, 8-5 Florida that BEAT No. 1* LSU in 2003.
Cal was Unranked, Florida was ranked 25th? (damn close to "27th")... like I told you "there are others" and you helped with that.SOS is a tricky issue, no doubt; weather its a Team's or Conference's SOS. And its inherent/intertwined with where teams Rate, individually. You really have to take a deep look at the "Rating" methods.
In determining Team/Conf Ratings and SOSes, you gotta understand that
- NOTHING is DEFINITIVE
- EVERYTHING is RELATIVE
- Each of the "Ratings" have their own flaws
- The "Polls" have their flaws; and only provide partial view of the entire CFB landscape
- Teams/conferences Ratings fluctuate from year to year (theres no carry-over)
- Its not easy to Conceptualize
- Conference Ratings mean "CONFERENCE" Ratings; All the teams in the Conference are Accounted for, not just the -Top whatever- teams.
- Ratings are based on ACTUAL RESULTS, on What happened and NOT on what coulda/woulda/shoulda happened.
- And again, NOTHING is DEFINITIVE (119 teams, from 11 different conferences, having an irregular amount of members/teams, playing about 12 games a season, only about a fourth vs OOC opponents).You really do have to look into it on your own if you want to have a solid understanding of it all... BUT lemme say this...
as far as the example you gave, I'm not sure exactly how the SOSes would break down, however I have to point out that there is a Distinction between a 70-something Rated team and a 100-something Rated team WHICH DOES MATTER, as a distinction between a 20-some Rated team & 50-some Rated team (though, the ratings at the Extreme Top [& bottom] do provide a different dynamic).
4-7 OK State beat 9-3 Texas Tech
4-7 Wake beat #21-Rated Clemson
3-8 Arizona beat 15th Ranked UCLA
By virtue of the fact that these otherwise lame teams, jumped up and BEAT relatively High Ranked/Rated teams, that sets them apart from other "4-7" and "3-8" teams that DIDNT.
... other examples from 2004...
69th-rated Michigan St beat 9-3 Wisconsin
70th-rated Wake beat 9-3 BC
71st-rated Miss beat 6-5 SCarl (they also didnt lose to bad teams)
76th-rated Arizona beat 9-3 ASU (they also didnt lose to bad teams)
78th-rated Baylor beat 7-5 aTm.
... Miss St beat 7-5 Florida, BUT also LOST to #106 Vandy & Non-D1A Maine! - Miss St ended up rated 92nd!So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 1, 2006 10:11 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
MOOK, THATS what I'm GETTING AT.
Its almost a birth-right (FROM THE GENERAL MEDIA/FAN's MIS-GUIDED PERSPECTIVE!) that in any given season, the SEC is 'Oh, so great' even before they play their first game! Its like they have a Built-in 'Benefit of the Doubt' in the general PERCEPTION. I say LET THEM PROVE IT with what they ACCOMPLISH each individual season.
On the overall scope of the college football world (I hate that this always becomes an issue but), the West/East "Bias" DOES Exist... its a factor in the over-rated, under-rated debates among fans (bars, books, boards, blogs), its a factor in the "Polls", its a factor in Bowl selections, its a factor in Conf Ranking debates.
But speaking specifically about the SEC, they seem to be generally over-hyped, over-ranked, or whathaveyou, moreso than other confs. And it doesnt ameliorate the 'perception vs reality' problem... that the SEC has its OWN NETWORK dedicated to itself.I know some of you have an aversion to the Computer Ratings but they are atleast a useful "Tool" in measuring teams' accomplishments (no, its not the end-all, be-all; nothing's definitive).
These are only subtle distintions (er, benefits of the doubt) but collectively it builds a legit case (similar outcome in recent history too);
Comparing the combined AP/Coaches Poll "Rankings"... with the Consensus Computer "Ratings" 2005:
Georgia was RANKED 9th (tied)... but RATED 14th
Auburn was RANKED 13th (tied)... but RATED 20th
Florida was RANKED 13th (tied)... but RATED 17th
LSU & Bama were closely Ranked/Rated.
As Reference, to show the Ratings arent programmed 'anti-SEC' or something...
Notre Dame was RANKED 9th (tied)... but RATED 19th
Louisville was RANKED 19th (tied)... but RATED 26th
Cal Berkeley was RANKED 25th... but RATED 34thAll of the benefit-of-the-doubts here and there (that SEC teams get), builds up the "perception" of a team's strength, which in turn builds up their opponents... when a few 'built-up' teams are in the same conference, the effect is amplified/worsened. Then, is when you get the... "but Auburn face an SEC schedule, how could they blah, blah, waa, waa"
These RATINGS (5 of the 6, anyway) are highly formulated equations that ONLY account for WINS & LOSSES - thats probably the most important thing to consider with this Comp Ratings... no regional bias, no personal bias, no 'tradition', no media hype, only Wins & Losses (but like Ive said, they all have their FLAWS, as do the Polls, etc).
Another dynamic that added to this mis-guided percetion, 2005 particularly, was that the SEC had a cluster of good teams at the top and a cluster of bad teams at the bottom. ACC, BTEN, PAC, XII didnt lack parity as much as the SEC overall. The casual/flakie CFB fan loves to form his opinions Only looking at "Top 25" media Polls (partial view of the grand scheme of things), they also dont account for the fact that some conferences have LESS teams, they dont grasp the true concept of SOS, etc... this "Perception" is different that Reality.
SEC, youre NOT the "NY Yankees" of college football Conferences. The greatest disparity between the SEC and say... the PAC, is that of the scope & scale of their Fandoms (fervor of the fans, passion for their teams, attendance numbers, etc)... its NOT the disparity ON THE FIELD, which varies from year to year.
The SEC was RATED the No. 5 Conference for 2005, PAC was No. 4... the Big TEN was rated 5th in '04 and 1st in '05.Duckman said:
posted on March 2, 2006 4:18 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Your post is entirely unsupported by fact and therefore is purely opinion. Lets take a look at Georgia’s schedule next year.-
9-2-06 WESTERN KENTUCKY
9-9-06 at South Carolina
9-16-06 UAB
9-23-06 COLORADO
9-30-06 at Mississippi
10-7-06 TENNESSEE
10-14-06 VANDERBILT
10-21-06 MISSISSIPPI STATE
10-28-06 vs. Florida @Jacksonville, FL
11-4-06 at Kentucky
11-11-06 at Auburn
11-25-06 GEORGIA TECH
This is one of the tough schedules that SEC fans rave about? In my opinion this is a joke! I looked and looked and everyone’s schedule looks about like this. The SEC has proven NOTHING on the field. They are no better then any other conference and that’s a fact!!
P.S.GO DUCKS!!!Duckman said:
posted on March 2, 2006 4:18 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Your post is entirely unsupported by fact and therefore is purely opinion. Lets take a look at Georgia’s schedule next year.-
9-2-06 WESTERN KENTUCKY
9-9-06 at South Carolina
9-16-06 UAB
9-23-06 COLORADO
9-30-06 at Mississippi
10-7-06 TENNESSEE
10-14-06 VANDERBILT
10-21-06 MISSISSIPPI STATE
10-28-06 vs. Florida @Jacksonville, FL
11-4-06 at Kentucky
11-11-06 at Auburn
11-25-06 GEORGIA TECH
This is one of the tough schedules that SEC fans rave about? In my opinion this is a joke! I looked and looked and everyone’s schedule looks about like this. The SEC has proven NOTHING on the field. They are no better then any other conference and that’s a fact!!
P.S.GO DUCKS!!!Gerald said:
posted on March 2, 2006 10:47 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clips:
You bash UGA and Auburn for losing to Wisconsin and West Virginia while the top two teams in your conference (Oregon and USC) lost as well, and that is in addition to mighty Cal losing to Texas Tech last year. So UCLA, Arizona State, and Cal won their bowl games this year. They were against mighty Northwestern, Rutgers, and Utah ... not a single team that finished with more than 7 wins.
The best team that UCLA beat this year? 8 - 4 Oklahoma. The best team that Oregon beat this year? 8 - 4 FRESNO. Southern Cal? Great team. Should have won the national title, would have if you guys still had Norm Chow or if LenDale White hadn't ballooned up to 258 lbs. because of pigging out during Thanksgiving and Christmas (per his own admission during the combine). But the rest of the PAC - 10? Please.
You can keep saying that the SEC doesn't play anybody and that they are overrated based on tradition, and how they are strong at the top but weak at the bottom but eventually that stuff wears thin. You want to talk about weak at the bottom? Washington, Washington State, Arizona, and Stanford losing to a Division II team, that's weak at the bottom. Except that you guys are a 10 team league, so your "bottom" is 40% of your whole conference! Living on reputation? Well, what has Washington done since Don James left? That one 11 - 1 fluke season that Rick Neuheisel had. What has UCLA done since, oh, THE SIXTIES? Before Pete Carroll, what had USC done since the 1970s? Oregon, Oregon State, Washington State, Arizona, Arizona State, what have they done EVER? And sure, John Elway played at Stanford and Bill Walsh coached there, but when was their last major bowl victory?
It is easy for you to point out the flaws in the SEC while USC, the only halfway decent team in the PAC - 10, is on their great run. But USC is not the PAC - 10, they are USC. USC is beyond reproach. It is the rest of the PAC - 10 that stinks. You guys talk about your mighty BCS bowl record. Look at the teams that you played. Purdue. Iowa. Notre Dame. Oklahoma. Colorado. Michigan. Wow. Real powerhouses there.
Say what you want about the SEC, they have 3 or 4 teams that year to year win 10 or more games a year and win national titles. UGA in 1980, Alabama in 1992, Florida in 1996, Tennessee in 1998, LSU in 2003, and that doesn't even include two undefeated Auburn teams. Meanwhile, the PAC -10 had two 8 - 4 teams represent their conference in the Rose Bowl during the 1990s, and has had two undefeated teams since 1973. It isn't because the conference is so tough, it is because the teams are mediocre. If the SEC was "overrated", then their undefeated teams would lose national title or bowl games. Hasn't happened. The only SEC team to lose a national title game OR undefeated SEC team to lose a bowl game was Florida to Nebraska in 1996.
Even last year, claiming that the SEC was overrated ... who was better? The PAC - 10? Who did any PAC - 10 team beat other than OU, Fresno, Northwestern, Rutgers, and BYU? The Big 10? Wisconsin beat Auburn, but Florida beat Iowa. A wash. As a matter of fact, the Big 10 had a losing record in bowl games: their top 3 teams (Wisconsin, Penn State, Ohio State) won (against inferior competition in Notre Dame and FSU mostly) but everyone else lost, including Minnesota like they do every year. The Big 12? Great bowl season but HORRIBLE regular season, and oh yes Texas Tech lost to Alabama, and Missouri only beat South Carolina because South Carolina's best player (Sidney Rice, who could go #1 overall) got hurt and missed the second half. The ACC? Please. 8 - 4 conference champion, Miami got killed by LSU 40 - 3 and fired their coaching staff, and Virginia Tech was beaten by no one with a pass defense.
The SEC had a down year last year? EVERYONE had a down year but Texas and to a much lesser extent Penn State. Period. The SEC was the best of an uninspired bunch, and that includes the PAC - 10, and yes that does include all those lethargic USC performances (the first half against Oregon, Arizona, Notre Dame, Arizona State). But none of that means anything because USC blew out 4 - 7 Arkansas 70 - 17 right? Please ...
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 2, 2006 12:33 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mooka:
Not gonna gripe too hard about what you have said, but: if you are taking historical references fine. Even Arkansas and Mississippi, more than South Carolina, could be respected. In the same vain: California, Washington, Stanford and Arizona State are comparable teams.
If you want to look at the shorter term picture: Tennessee, Alabama and Florida have not been knocking the world dead over the last six years, either.
But, where you're really caught is right here: "If you want real competition - bring it on in the SEC". Does that imply that we must play in your house? If so - that is not real fair. Now, both Arkansas and LSU came west last year. Arkansas, which I consider a decent team, was destroyed by USC. This implies nothing as most teams were. But, Arizona State put a pretty decent scare into LSU. Why not more of your so called great teams venture west and try and take on some of our more higher echelon teams. Let's see what happens then? This year (2006): Washington State will travel to Auburn, USC will travel to Fayetteville and California will travel to Tennessee. I still think that we could take two of three if not all of them. Granted, Washington State would have to play a whale of a game to beat Auburn or they just might be destroyed. We'll see what happens next year. But, no matter what: if California beats Tennessee y'all just claim that Tennessee was down. We'll never get credit no matter what.Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 2, 2006 8:34 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCalClip:
If you read my post I stated, "Oh, maybe once in about fifty games or so, some team ranked between 20-30, might knock off a Top Five team".
Now, in the last four years USC was 48-4 and had been 46-1 going into the game with Texas. Yes, that one loss was to an 8-6 California team. Prior to that, way back in 2002, USC had lost to an 11-2 Kansas State team that had only been beaten by Texas and Colorado in Colorado. They also were beaten in Pullman by a Washington state team that would finish at 10-3 with a loss to Oklahoma in the Rose Bowl. They had also lost at Ohio State and against Washington, their in-state rival, in Pullman. So, in the case of USC - they had only lost to one team probably not ranked in the Top Ten in the last fifty-two games between 2002 and 2006.
Now, let's try Oklahoma. Between 2000 and 2004 Oklahoma was 60-7. In 2004 they got beat by USC for the National Championship in the Fiesta Bowl. In 2003 they lost the Big 12 Championship to an 11-4 Kansas State team that would lose to Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl. Oklahoma would also lose the Orange Bowl to National Champion Louisiana State. In 2002 Oklahoma was beaten at College Station by an 6-6 Texas A&M team. They would also lose to an 8-5 Oklahoma State team that won six of their last seven games - including a convincing win over Southern Mississippi in the Houston Bowl. In 2001 Oklahoma would lose to a lousy 4-7 Oklahoma State team and to a 11-2 Nebraska team that would lose to Miami in the Rose Bowl. In 2000 Oklahoma would be undefeated National Champion. So, in those sixty-seven games, Oklahoma did lose to two lousy teams and one questionable team in the 2002 Oklahoma State team (I don't know their final rank) and to four other really good teams in Miami, Nebraska, LSU and USC.
Do you want me to look up how often the great Miami, Florida State and Nebraska teams lost to teams ranked outside the Top Twenty? It might very well be one or zero over many hundreds of games. I'd still say that it is about every fifty games that a lower ranked team can actually beat a legitimate Top Five team.Tommie Trojan
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 2, 2006 10:00 PM — 204.62.104.213 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
What "bash"? Im not bashing any 'Team'... Im setting mis-guided Bloggers straight.
No one on this site can watch or account for EVERY GAME... we could all have our "opinions" about weather Auburn woulda lost to UCLA in a hypothetical matchup, or vice versa... how USC woulda done facing (SEC Champ)Georgia's schedule, or vice versa... debate if its Legit or Lame using arguements like "But, but, Arkansas got better as the year went on" and "Hey, Wazzu finished with a 16-point proximity of being 9-2! for the season", and on and on... BUT in going about Rating teams, conferences and SOSes, we DO have the ACTUAL RESULTS of the matchups that ACTUALLY HAPPENED which ARENT OPINION to go by!
... and sure theres still ambiguity there, ei... XII faced a relatively weaker SOS than the other confs... the SEC lacked parity... the PAC and BTEN have less teams... other skews, etc... but all we can go on, in Determining ratings and SOSes, are the ACTUAL RESULTS! Like it or not, thats what the Rating base their finding on - its not a group of tech geeks hacking in whatever they want; its based on Ws and Ls, upon Ws and Ls, upon Ws and Ls.The SEC was lame in 2005, simply put. Contrary to popular dim-witted belief, the Polls dont provide a complete view of where "Conferences" rank among each other. Its not a matter of counting the amount of teams in the 'Top ##'...
Even going by that mis-guided logic, in terms of Conference SOSes, the SEC faced the LEAST percentage of 'Top 25 teams' (AP/Coaches Poll) of the 5 major Confs... the SEC also faced the 2nd LEAST percentage of 'Bowl teams' (XII was worse) another mis-guided method.#9 Cal Berkeley losing to #18 Texas Tech, yeah thats ACCOUNTED for! We could counter back-n-forth with lil pieces of data... Utah(4-4 MtW) KILLED Georgia Tech(5-3 ACC) 38-10, thats the team that beat Auburn(7-1 SEC) at home... Stanford lost to non-D1A *Cal Davis... the SEC Champs got beat by, essentially, a Mid-Major Champ...
Auburn GOT beat by Wisconsin(5-3 BTEN)
UCLA BEAT Northwestern(5-3 BTEN)
... Wiscy didnt face Ohio St (softer in-conf sos), NWern BEAT Wiscy heads up.
Versus OOC - NW faced 7-5 ASU [LOSS], 7-5 No Ill, 4-7 Ohio... while Wiscy faced 4-7 Hawaii, 6-5 BG, 0-11 Temple (all obvious wins).
Sure UCLA has a Bad Defense (as did NWern) but remember, Wisconsin had the 100th-ranked Defense goin into the CapOne Bowl... Auburn put up 10 points.... all these matchups, THEY'RE ALL ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE RATINGS. [*Colley Matrix ignores non-D1A opponents - again, they all have flaws, nothing is definitive]
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 2, 2006 11:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald & any SEC-over-hypsters,
Listen to your Claim, then listem to mine...
SEC - the SEC is easily the best conference top to bottom, every year... the PAC is practically the Big EastMe - the perception of the SEC is more Hype than reality... for 2005 the SEC was rated 5th, the PAC was rated 4th... conference rankings fluctuate from year to year
See Im not making outrageous claims about the PAC and Im not the one ignoring the practicallity of the Ratings - when did I say "the SEC doesnt play anybody"? But if you SEC-over-hypster are gonna make trite, homeristically delusional claims about Conf Ratings, etc, Im gonna have to temper that HYPE with reality... The SEC faced an overall unspectacular SOS (as did the PAC) and ended up with the WORST Record among the 5 major Confs this yr.
Yeah, Stanford lost to a Non-D1A team, that drags em DOWN, that's all taken into consideration(SEC lost to a Non-D1A team in 2004, similar affect) all-in-all 5-6 Stanford finished Rated in among 5-6 Purdue, 5-6 aTm, etc. Wazzu's rated No. 75, Arkansas's No. 74. Washington was the only PAC team that was "horrible"... er, Rated in the Bottom 30... the SEC had THREE! (same in 2004) Kentucky, Miss, Miss St... and only One team from the other major confs was Rated worse (Duke)! Arizona finished rated closer to Ark & Wazzu than Kentucky & Washington - just "bad"...not "horrible" if you will.... Again, throwing out bits & pieces of data like this back and forth is just spinning our wheels... the Consensus Ratings paint a more complete picture... and its YEAR-TO-YEAR.
(similar Ratings that had the SEC Ranked No.1 and 2 so many times in previous years).Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 3, 2006 11:00 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCalClip:
I did review Nebraska's records from around 1982 thru 1998 and I can find only about three losses to less than stellar teams. That would be about another 180-190 games. I've only chosen some of the teams that are always close to the top over a period of years, as any other Top Five team in any year, would have suffered zero losses to inferior teams (or else they would not be ranked that highly). So, it still stands to reason that teams ranked after #20 do not stand much of a chance of beating the top programs in the country. Look it up yourself. For years and years the top programs seldom lose to any team that is not already in the Top Ten. This has been happening for a long, long time. There have been many great programs that have stood up for a number of years. The common thread and what makes them that is that they just don't lose to inferior schools.
Tommie Trojan
Mooka said:
posted on March 3, 2006 12:48 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
Tommie T,
If I recall correctly Arizona St. put quite a scare on the big bad USC as well. If it wasn't what I call a thrown game from Hagan by giving USC the ball on a game winning drive I think Ari St. could've won that one. Fair enough that you say they gave LSU a scare, even under the circumstances. Whatever.
Can you please expound on this comment:
"Does that imply that we must play in your house? If so - that is not real fair. Now, both Arkansas and LSU came west last year."
So how is it fair that we went west but you can't play in our house, mainly against slightly(that's all I ask) better SEC teams? Arizona St. was ranked 15th when we played them. What was Arkansas ranked? 80? I wouldn't compare Ari. St. to Arkansas last year. Terrible comparison.
Just so you know I wasn't talking about historic records, I'm talking about current of course.Here are some of the win margins from SEC last year and PAC-10
SEC PAC-10
LSU 11-2 USC 12-1
Alabama 10-2 ORE 10-2
Georgia 10-3 UCLA 10-2
Auburn 9-3 CAL 8-4
Florida 9-3Number of ranked opponents in regular season:
SEC PAC-10
LSU 5 USC 5
Alabama 4 Oregon 4
Georgia 5 UCLA 3
Auburn 3 CAL 3
Florida 5SoCAL Clips, please don't try to give me any more of your SOS results. This is easy math. I'm sure you can figure out for yourself that there is no comparison between SEC football and PAC-10 football. NONE. Bottom line.
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 3, 2006 8:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T, this whole thing is overblown.
You dont say that a No. 25-30 team should "stand no chance" against a No. 1... theres pleanty of competition in CFB.
Sure its somewhat "rare" that a chump-team BEATS a quality team (Title Contending team) that IS what weeds out the true Contenders... but even THAT happens:
... 3-8 Cincy BEAT the Big TEN CHAMPS in 1999, #4 Wiscy!
... Unranked Fresno State beat the XII CHAMPS in 2001
... Non-Bowl La Tech beat the SEC CHAMPS in 1999
... Non-Bowl Marshall beat the XII CHAMPS in 2003
and there are pleanty of "close games" too, that atleast "stood a chance"
... (2-5 MtW) San Diego St 21 - Michigan 23 (Mich was BTEN Co-Champs)
... (3-4 MtW) SD St 13 - Ohio St 16 (11-2, Ranked No.4)
... 4-7 Akron vs 10-2 VTech: 18-21
... 5-7 UAB vs 11-3 Georgia: 13-16
... 4-8 Mid Tenn St vs 10-3 Bama: 34-39
... 6-5 No Ill vs 10-2 Ill: 24-29
... 7-5 Troy vs 9-3 LSU: 20-24
... 7-5 Miami OH vs 11-2 Iowa: 24-29
... 7-5 Houston vs 10-2 LSU: 34-35and those are just some, and only listed MID-MAJOR TEAMS there, and only in from the past few years.
... maybe your right, I just like to argue, but you made you claim a bit too definitive... CFB is pretty competative, even the bad teams have a shot at the big boys.Bleed Crimson said:
posted on March 4, 2006 2:13 AM — 72.146.27.191 — link — abuse?
Jealous Pac10 fans:
One thing that you need to think about when trying to bring the SEC down to your level IS the "hype". The question i want someone to answer is WHY IS THERE THE HYPE?? I mean obviously its not because the SEC is a good conference because i mean look at the ratings Oh My God!!! Maybe the answer is not based on the last 2 or 3 years when the pac and the bigten have taken the NC game away because of a BCS LOOPHOLE. but over time. What creates hype? for USC-ESPN, for the SEC-it is the facts and fans. The SEC always has the best recruiting classes, the highest rated staff, the best fans, biggest stadiums, and more great programs(over all-time) than anywhere else.(PERIOD) There is no contradicting that. Its mainly because out west nobody cares about football except USC fans, ESPN, and the occasional duck fan. HAVE YOU NOTICED THAT THE BLOG ABOUT THE BIGGEST PAC-10 TEAM HAS MORE POSTS FROM SEC FANS. Ill put it in a different perspective - Michigan, Virginia Tech, Penn State, Texas, Ohio State, and Oklahoma - all in the same conference. Those are all programs that match the strength of: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, LSU (in that same order). Maybe some of those programs dont even match up to our schools.
Duckman said:
posted on March 5, 2006 7:40 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Mooka,
You state ”If I recall correctly Arizona St. put quite a scare on the big bad USC as well. If it wasn't what I call a thrown game from Hagan by giving USC the ball on a game winning drive I think Arizona St. could've won that one”. If I recall correctly (lol) the second half score was 35-7. What game winning drive are you referring to? As you can plainly see their was know scare at all. ASU (PAC-10 5th best team) was able to scare LSU (SEC 2nd best team). After that you go on to give us stats that tell us how the BCS ranked opponents each conference played. In order for those numbers to be credible you would have to believe in the BCS ranking systems ability to say who is the better team on any given day. Only a fool would believe in the BCS!! Even if you do believe in the BCS system those numbers don’t help you case because they are almost identical. Next you go on to compare records. These numbers have very little relevance to this debate because they were playing mostly in their own conferences. Even if they were relevant those numbers are also almost identical. The only credible evidence are PAC-10 vs. SEC math ups. In those match ups the SEC has show know dominance over the PAC-10. Your post seemed to not only hurt your case but hurt your credibility as well. You have proven that you are more then willing twist the facts (see statement above) to try to help your case. Stick to the facts!!
Bleed Crimpson,
Your post gives absolutely no facts that would prove SEC dominance. Your post seems to be intended on building HYPE more then building a case to support you statements. Tell me about games played. Tell me wear the SEC has shown dominance while playing credible non-conference games. Fact is that they haven’t. If the SEC is as dominant as you suggest then why don’t they win every non-conference game they play?
The SEC is average at best. They have had their chances to show their dominance and the fact is that they were unable to do that. Say it as many times as you want as loud as you want but it wont make it true.
P.S. GO DUCKS!!!/PAC-10
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 5, 2006 2:26 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka you clueless mofo,
that NOT a true comparison of "conferences"... do you understand the concept? there are more than just 4 or 5 teams in a Conference.
Are you intentionally being goofy or do you really believe that?
Here's some goofiness in case youre not seeing your own mis-guided logic:
3-8 **Miss St... 2-9 **Washington
3-8 **Old Miss... 3-8 Arizona
3-8 **Kentucky... 4-7 Wazzu
4-7 Arkansas... 5-6 Oregon St
5-6 Vandy... 5-6 Stanford
5-6 Tenn... ???** = Team Rated in the "Bottom" 30 of college football (SEC 3, PAC 1).
~ Oh, well... that makes things crystal clear ~Goofball, you cant ingore the fact that the PAC has 10 teams, the SEC has 12.
Like I've been saying, NOTHING is DEFINITIVE here, when talking Conference Rankings, etc... Theres not a "Clear Cut" anything... BUUUUUT the SEC happens to be Rated the No. 5 Conference for 2005, they happen to have the WORST record of the 5 major conferences, etc...
If its not easy for you to Conceptualize, then keep in mind that those 10-2, 9-3's that the top half of the SEC built-up, came from beating up on the bottom feeders of, not only the Conference, but of College Football (SEC has 3 teams Rated in the Bottom 30, no other major conf had more than 1).The consensus Ratings dont seem to be Out-of-Whack anywhere else do they? Roughly:
1 BTEN
2 XII (best win %, but subpar SOS)
3 ACC
4 PAC
5 SEC
6 BEast
7 MtWest
8 CUSA
9 MAC
10 WAC
11 SBelt...the Ratings didNT put the Sun Belt at No.3 or something... the two Mid-Majors, BEast/MtWest are about in the Middle... the XII gets penalized for their relatively WEAK SOS, but not completely massacred like it did by "public opinion", er over-Hype, they still did well overall... even the worst team in the XII wasnt "horrible"... XII's Worst team & SEC's 5th Worst were Rated about the same; OK State was 65th, Vandy was 63rd (ark, miss, miss st, ktky were worse)... again, in-it-of-itself, Parity with-in a Conf or lack of it, does not determined Conf strength! THAT LACK OF PARITY in the SEC produced that effect (those 10-2, 9-3 teams), its NOT Conference Strength.
Here's a Wonderlic type of essay question for ya, just to see if youre... uh... just to see...
This is the actual 2005 SEC in-conf Record:
Geo *7-2
LSU 7-2*
Aub 7-1
Bama 6-2
Flor 5-3
SCarl 5-3
Tenn 3-5
Vandy 3-5
Kntky 2-6
Ark 2-6
Miss 1-7
MisSt 1-7This is the actual 2005 SEC OOC Record: 30-12
How would the "Strength" of the SEC and/or "Conference Ranking" be affected if the in-conf records were all
4-4 (*except for two teams, 4-5 & 5-4 due to conf-champ game), but the OOC Record remained exactly the same? SEC'd be stronger? weaker? ranked higher, lower, the same? can not be determined it with just that information?
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 6, 2006 12:22 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
SoCalClip:
I still don't understand what your point is. Yes, on occasion there will be upsets. That is why they call them that. But, in the vast majority of cases, when a Top Five program loses a game, it happens to another Top Ten team - usually in a "Bowl Game" or a "Conference Championship Game". Great teams do not lose to teams ranked between 20-30. It is very rare. And, coming close does not count. There is quite a bit of dropoff from the top teams to the upper mid tier teams. You seem to be really having a hard time with this one. When I stated that a #27 team should have no chance against a #1 ranked team - that is a fact. A #1 ranked team should pummel that team, and in a vast majority of cases, they do. The key word is "should". Pay attention to the language. It does not imply that it can't and does not happen. I'm saying that a true #1 team should never lose to a #27th ranked team. And, if they did - they would not end up #1. There is the rare occasion that these games do happen - but they are very unlikely. Again, close does not count. If you want to go look at the records of Miami and Florida State back when they were consistent Top Five teams - I'm sure that for around ten years, or 120 games, they lost to no teams ranked outside of the Top Ten. Oh, there may be one or two. But, I might still insist that it is about one out of every fifty games that these kind of upsets can happen. Those are not good odds for the underdog winning the game. And my point is a good one: why take into account SOS involving teams that have virtually no chance of winning these games? I mean, who cares if your team is playing #59, while some other team is playing #79? There will be no upsets here - no way! If you want to beleive that considering all teams into a SOS makes sense to you - then I'm okay with that. Traditionally, that has been the way that it has been done. I just try and think "outside the bun".
Tommie Trojan
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 6, 2006 5:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Bleeding Tide,
Take a step back listen to YOURSELF... you ARE the Over-Hype that Im talking about.
... "Best Recruits"
- then that would make the SEC the Most UNDER ACHIEVING conference too
... "highest rated staffs"
- lol
... "the 'best' fans"
- that feeds the hype
... citing "stadium" sizes
- as some sort of legit criteria, Ha!
... "more great programs [historically]"
- check again
... citing the number of Blog postings !@!??@#?
- ah haa, are you serious?! your pitching slow balls, thats HYPE, that has nothing to do with the Results on the Field.This is the Hype Im talking about.
Historically speaking, using some of the more widely recognized Championship-selection orginizations(AP, Coaches/BCS, Dickinson, Helms, CFRA, NCF), on a Team-for-Team basis, in terms of what matters MOST, National Titles, the Big TEN is FAR AND AWAY the best conference:
1 Big TEN - 39 Titles, 11-team Conf
2 PAC - 24 Titles, 10-team Conf
3 XII - 26 Titles, 12-team Conf
3 SEC - 26 Titles, 12-team Conf
5 ACC - 13 Titles, 12-team Conf
Note: thats using teams' current Conf affiliation
and if you limit those Selection orgs (Helms, CFRA, NCF) to prior to 1936 (AP), the Conf Ranking results are similar... the SEC is hardly dominant.SEC teams hide behind their Attendance - 86 reg/season games vs the PAC all-time & only 28 of em were on the Road. Is it a huge surprise that its almost the exact inverse; SEC's win record over the PAC... and... the SEC's road games vs the PAC (including quasi-home & road Bowl games too). SEC fans: "well teams make more money if they play us here, bla bla"
Youre right about ESPN, they were su*king on USC's "D" all year. Hype!@ they WANTED it to be "the story" so they pushed and pushed it... comparing USC 05 to some of the greatest "CHAMPIONS" of the past before they even faced Texas (and some started the talk before the UCLA game) was ridiculous... THATS HYPE... the reality is that USC lost, defense depleted by injuries or not, regardless that it taking one of the greatest Bowl performances to beat them... USC Lost. The thing is that I 'recognize' that ESPN/the media over-hyped USC in 05... YOU dont seem to 'recognize' that the SEC overall, was not good this year (or last year).
And by the way the Big TEN hasnt even been in the BCS Title game the past 2, 3 years... Im sure you meant to say the XII.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 7, 2006 12:57 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
I thought I'd take a gander into some of SoCalClips peeks: sure enough! Since the year 2000: the Pac-10 is 7-3 against the SEC. I will be using Massey's rankings as a comparison just for giggles.
2000 #70 Alabama 24 at #41 UCLA 35
2001 #21 UCLA 20 at #25 Alabama 17
2002 #102 Mississippi St. 13 at #57 Oregon 36
2002 #15 Auburn 17 at #1 USC 242003 #1 LSU 59 at #110 Arizona 13
2003 #35 Oregon 42 at #117 Mississippi St. 34
2003 #2 USC 23 at #23 Auburn 02004 #16 Oregon State 21 at #19 LSU 22
2005 #7 LSU 35 at #38 Arizona State 31
2005 #74 Arkansas 17 at #2 USC 70Interesting that the average SEC team was ranked #45 and the average Pac-10 team was ranked #32. Nevertheless, the average score was 31.5 to 23.8, in favor of the Pac-10 (while they compiled a 7-3 record). It is also interesting that LSU, Auburn and Alabama made up seven of these ten games. Six of the ten games were played at the Pac-10's homefield.
But, what I find the most fascinating is that those stellar defenses in the SEC - could only "hold" the Pac-10 teams to 31.5 pints per game. Meanwhile, the Pac-10 defenses only gave up 23.8, which is probably below most of the leagues averages.
Let the excuses begin! I know! The Pac-10 only scheduled games when they knew that certain SEC teams were going to have bad years. Remember though: average rating of #32 isn't exactly stellar for the Pac-10 either.Tommie Trojan
Mooka said:
posted on March 7, 2006 4:15 PM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
Duckman, Duckman, Duckman,
Last time I checked Arizona St and Arizona are 2 different schools. You wanna talk about credibility you need to just change your name so next time you blog no one will know it's you.
First of all Arizona St. was beating the big bad USC 21-3 in the first half. Furthermore they didn't start losing til the 4th quarter. What game are you talking about?
Secondly, I never metioned anything about BCS.
However, I will give you some credit for making the point about SEC-PAC10 match-ups. That's also why I was trying to make the point that PAC-10--mainly USC-- needs to play slightly better SEC teams, then let me hear'em talk some smack. Like I was saying, don't compare Arizona St. to Arkansas either. Yes Arkansas is in the SEC and yes Arkansas is garbage. If Arkansas is playing a PAC-10 team let them play somewhere in the ballpark of their own caliber such as UCLA, CAL, or maybe even Oregon. You know...the other so called 'best' teams PAC-10 has to offer.HAHAHASoCal Slippers,
Your name calling doesn't make your point any more evident than the case you build. You are not recognizing the simple, simple facts that the top SEC teams played twice as many ranked teams and pulled off twice as many big Ws as the so called top Pac-10 teams. Ladies and gentlemen it doesn't get any more simple than that fact. Go ahead and pull up more BCS BS, but you know that I know and I know that you know you wish PAC-10 has it goin' on like the SEC.
You try to make a point that PAC-10 has less teams than SEC. Okay? So? Just imagine than if SEC had as many teams as PAC-10. Let's say they were both 10...Yep, your conference is still looking like garbage. Your problem is you are thinking inside the very small window of BCS. You need to take a real look at at the number of the winning programs and I can't stress that concept enough, WINNING PROGRAMS---Let me spell that for you--- W-I-N-N-I-N-G P-R-O-G-R-A-M-S compared to any other conference. If you had a favorite team in the SEC you would be proud of that fact as well. But you don't, so I could see why you are mad at us "SEC BEST CONFERENCE IN THE UNIVERSE WINNERS" and you would be even happier to watch a team like USC win Championships after facing a SEC schedule.
Let me ask you something and please give me an honest answer, If USC faced Auburn, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Georgia (just to name a few) all in the same year nevermind the OOC schedule do you honestly think they would walk away from the season unblemished? HAHAHA...Seriously. We both know the answer to that don't we, but go ahead and tell me your 'honest' answer.
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on March 7, 2006 5:54 PM — 72.146.27.191 — link — abuse?
Socalclips and other pac10 fans:
yea i was referring to the bigxii. but you just prove my point: instead of answering the question: "why is there hype about the SEC?" you just tried to debate all of my answers. i do like the national championship point you made, but most of the teams that used to win NCs for the big ten have died out (nebraska). and the same goes for the big12 (big2). the only team that has somewhat died down for the SEC is alabama but in case you dont get SI, "BAMA Is Back."
SOMEBODY PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION: why is there more hype surrounding the SEC than any other conference? and dont even start to say its the media because the media hates the SEC
Lets just be honest and not biased
ACC : basketball
SEC : football
its as simple as that.Duckman said:
posted on March 7, 2006 10:49 PM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Hear we go again. PAC-10 fans give you credible stats and numbers and all we hear back are opinions and the regular SEC nonsense. I beg you to come up with a credible argument. When I read questions like “ If USC faced Auburn, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Georgia (just to name a few) all in the same year never mind the OOC schedule do you honestly think they would walk away from the season unblemished” I laugh. Any answer would be purely opinion despite which way you wanted to go. The same could be said about every question asked. Every statement, every word is unsupported and purely opinion. Surly if their was any truth to the SEC being the best conference their would be some evidence to show it but instead we get to read your petty little insults and your foundationless opinions. The SEC has had many chances to prove their so-called dominance and have failed in doing so. THAT’S A FACT! Sure they won a game hear and a game their but wears the dominance? The only good answer would have facts and not opinion. PLEASE somebody give me a credible post BACED ON FACTS to argue and debate BACED ON FACTS!!! The more insults and opinions you post the more foolish you make yourself look. Stop making yourself look like a bunch of kids holding their hand over their ears screaming “were number one, were number one” and post something credible! I don’t mean to offend any of you but up untill this point their has not been a good case made for the SEC in any of your posts. If I am wrong please point out the post number so I can read it.
P.S.GO DUCKS!!!Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 8, 2006 12:04 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
And the STUD TEAM is: RICE
After looking through all upcoming schedules - these guys got real heart. Rice is gonna take on Texas, Florida State and UCLA on their non-conference agenda. I'll cast them as my preseason #1 just for having the biggest eggs in the NCAA.
Next of course: is your USC Trojans. I can't find any other team who even comes close to the Arkansas, Nebraska and Notre Dame noncon schedule that these guys will face. So, I'll put the Trojans up as my preseason #2 - right behind Rice.Tommie Trojan
Mooka said:
posted on March 8, 2006 12:25 PM — 138.163.0.43 — link — abuse?
Tommie T,
Thank you for pulling up some of those SEC-PAC10 match-ups. I always had a hunch PAC-10 was playing some pretty garbage SEC teams to have such a good record. However, I won't say anything about the Auburn and USC match-ups. I think those were definitely solid Ws for USC. Hey, I've got a lot of respect for the USC program. You guys belong here in the SEC with the big dogs. Ya'll could be an extension to the SEC West. We'll call ya'll SEC WEST COAST WEST. Go ahead and call Pete Carroll, ask him what he thinks about that idea.
Duckman,
I am still waiting for clarification on that game you were talking about. If you want a simple fact please refer back to post #210.
AzTank said:
posted on March 8, 2006 2:40 PM — 131.52.121.101 — link — abuse?
Tommy Trojan,
I guess Rice is hurting for money eh? That is just damned brutal! Here is something for you though...I went to break down OOC SOS for the SEC and PACX...just to see. It was mainly pretty even (as far as the winning % of OOC teams that they played). Things that stood out were that the SEC teams made hay playing Sun Belt (worst conference in D1) schools that had winning records (thus improving the look of their OOC schedules). And CAL has an absolutely horrid (opposing OOC teams have somewhere near a 30% winning %)OOC SOS. They should be EMBARRASED. Hell, I am embarrased for them.
Mooka said:
posted on March 8, 2006 3:50 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
URRGHUMM...Back to the topic
These are my picks for wins and loses for USC this year.
Arkansas-- Arkansas is mad, they will fight but lose by 10
Nebraska--W by 20
Arizona--W by 14
Washington State--W by 30
Washington--W by 21
Arizona State--W by 14
Oregon State--W by 10
Stanford--W by 14
Oregon--L by 3
California--L by 7
Notre Dame--L by 10
UCLA--W by 10
USC loses 3 games this year due to playing tough teams that have something to prove at the end of the season.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 8, 2006 4:26 PM — 204.62.104.216 — link — abuse?
UCLA alone has more Basketball Titles than the ENTIRE ACC COMBINED!... and up until this past season (UNC winning), UCLA had more Titles & had Won more Recently than North Carolina, Kansas, and Indiana COMBINED.
PAC has 15 Basketball Titles; ACC, Big TEN, 10 each. In Football, Big TEN has FAR MORE Titles than the SEC, easily.
ACC = Women's Stick & Ball sports (lacrosse, soccer, etc... then maybe Mens Basketball)
SEC = Girls Running Schools (Girls track&field, Girls indoor track, Girls cross-country, then maybe Football)
Big TEN = Football, Swimming, Coed Fencing, Gymnastics... (then maybe Basketball)
PAC = Baseball, Basketball, MENS Track, Tennis, etc... (then maybe football)
XII = Wrestling, Golf?No offense, but this is the U.S.A. its about No.1 - That break-down is going by National Titles.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 8, 2006 5:27 PM — 204.62.104.216 — link — abuse?
Bleeding Tide;
What are we doing here? After I basically say you "ARE" my point... You say that Im proving your point...Dont convolute the issue... you ask why there's so much more hype surrounding SEC teams then you go about listing a bunch of stuff like bigger stadiums, "best fans", recruits, etc... BUT THEN you finish with comparing the "STRENGTH" of SEC teams to Michigan, VTech, Penn St, Texas etc...
Hype doesnt equal Strength!
All that stuff you listed is harmless on its own (silly pissing-contest ammo at worst), but when you equate THAT with STRENGTH (of a team or conf) it produces a spark known as `*+HYPE+*'
- unfounded claims of greatness, ei, ESPN comparing USC's 2005 team to History's best before USC even faced Texas! etc...Show me National Titles, then the Hype is not Hype.
Your question - why is there the hype? - its probably a bit like the chicken-or-the-egg thing, somewhat of a catch-22, but at some point the "perception" of the SEC's "Strength" got ahead of Reality (most tangible measure, USA-style: National Titles)... the egg started walking before it hatched (Hype)
I made a previous claim that sorta helped answer that question (partially)... about College Football fan-rabidness being largely a "Piss-town" sorta thing... basically, you get the people/fans who REALLY care about "selling out" their staduims, "supporting" their team, bleeding their school color *eh em, Crimson* they wear it like a badge of honor... wereas Big City teams, for lack of a better term, are less involved with that sort of sappy stuff - no offense.
Its not just a "West Coast" thing as some of you would like to believe...
Big Southern City Miami/Miami-U drew 45,000 fans/game this season... piss-town UTEP drew 47K
Big Southern City Atlanta/Georgia Tech doesnt sell-out regularly & their stadium only seat about 55K... in the piss-town down the road Athens/Georgia sells-out 92K-seats (even when they dont sellout, still draws bout 85K)
Boston College in Big City Boston? Doesnt even seat 45K and Doesnt sellout
Maryland in D.C. 55K-seats
Northwestern in 8-Million-Pop, Chicago? 30K is a good season.
Major cities, Dallas & Houston - SMU, North Texas, TCU, Houston, Rice?
The one exception is Michigan in Big City Detroit/AnnArbor (USC, UCLA and maybe even Washington have a mixed dynamic).
SEC team are all in piss-towns, er Small-towns, the biggest city is Nashville and thats Vandy's home! which draws... 28,000?So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 8, 2006 6:52 PM — 204.62.104.216 — link — abuse?
Mookie, ignore my name-calling, bad habit...
Explain that one again - whats the 'simple fact'... SEC, twice as many... huh?
And what is it that we 'both know'... that I'd rather have the PAC have it "going on" like the SEC? You mean...
- Undefeated teams that dont play for the National Title?... having Title winners be named Champions by a contractually obligated Coaches Poll vote (when you know, and I know, and he knows, and they know that the Coaches Poll had USC No.1, and if not for the "BCS BS", LSU wouldNT have won Sh*# in 2003).Up until this season, the PAC was the ONLY Confernce to have TWO team Ranked (AP/Coaches) in the Top 10 every year this Century! And going by the quasi-BCS-format Rankings (after accounting for the Bowl results), Oregon finished tied for 10th. And again, the "Polls" are only a partial/incomplete/mis-guidING view of the entire CFB landscape... the 10 teams vs 12 teams disparity plays an additional mis-guiding effect/perception to the dim-witted CFB fan... its not as simple as erasing two teams from the SEC to make the comparison work. The entire "Number of Top 25 teams decides Conference strength" is an erroneous premise.
Conference Rankings are just that "Conference" rankings, Top to Bottom.By the way, that Wonderlic question I posed to you... did you have a response?
Im not the one thinking "inside a very small window"... HOW MANY TIMES do I have to say Nothing is Definitive!!! I've specifically said that the BCS Ratings areNT the Holy Grail, NOT the end-all, be-all... only a valuable tool that looks at an overview of the College Football landscape.
USC (PAC Champs) facing Auburn's schedule in 2004 (SEC Champs)?... Why WOULDNT I think that USC would "walk away unblemished"?! Where's the Joke?
USC facing (SEC Champ)Georgia's schedule in 2005? I would just about Guarantee! that USC wouldnt finishes with No THREE LOSSES! The only team that beat USC were the NATIONAL CHAMPIONS... Georgia faced 4 top 25 teams I'm supposed to be Blown Away with that? Please... Geo, didnt even face #8 Bama, yeah thats the kinda details that YOU PEOPLE (hypsters) tend to ingore (again, that 12 teams vs 10 teams thing).
And its that Incredulous mentality..." HAHAHA Seriously. We both know the answer to that don't we"... that makes the SEC a fluffed up Confernce in terms of perception.The biggest disparity between the PAC and the SEC is NOT on the Field... its their Fan's rabid-ness, blind devotion ("blind" being the operative word), dogmatic Southerncentricity, etc.
Trey said:
posted on March 8, 2006 7:12 PM — 162.40.92.57 — link — abuse?
Mooka you are such a dumb ass. You predict Oregon and Cal will beat USC in the same breath that you say USC will beat Nebraska by 20, Washington State by 30, and ASU by 30? I wish this was Vegas instead of a blog because it would take nothing to put you in the poor house based on those pics!
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 8, 2006 7:42 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
AZTank:
No doubt Rice needs the bread. They ought to just send all there guys out selling girl scout cookies or Amway or something. It sure would be alot safer.
And, yeah your right, California is sometimes just the biggest embarrassment to this conference. You know, Tedford is a Fresno State alumnus (started at QB there) and won't even give the Bulldogs a game. Too afraid that he might get beat. Fresno would love to play that game - but, Tedford aint got the hair to play it. Besides, Fresno probably would maul them in that game.Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 8, 2006 8:10 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mooka:
I love it. SEC West Coast West. I've talked to Pete and he likes it too. We're gonna move to vacate the Pac-10 and beg for membership into the SEC. Pete says that he thinks that SEC stands for "Southerners Envy Californians". Is that correct? I wouldn't know anything about that, but, I do know that envy breeds hatred. Is that why most SEC fans hate USC?
Tommie Trojan
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on March 8, 2006 10:23 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mooka:
You guys can't have it both ways. Many preseason prognostications have the Trojans and Longhorns and possibly Ohio State occupying the top three spots. Now, you're gonna claim that Oregon and California are tough teams and can take the Trojans? How can this be when the Pac-10 is so well known to be just a conference full of cupcakes for USC to walk all over? And, I understand that most NFL scouts had exclaimed, "That if JD Booty had decided to leave USC early this year he would have been a sure fire 1st round draft pick". Now, if that guy is really that good (without ever having started a game, although he did beat out Matt Kassel (who backs up Tom Brady at New England) and almost beat out Matt Leinart, as a true freshman ) - how can you give those lousy Pac-10 teams any kind of a chance against USC? Are we thinking that those lousy Pac-10 teams might be Top Ten also? How could that possibly be? Oh, and in case nobody knows this, UCLA's quarterback (Ben Olsen) is gonna be better than the one they had last year (Drew Olsen). So, maybe that lousy UCLA team that went 10-2, and demolished Oklahoma and Northwestern, might have a shot too? Here is the deal: either the Pac-10 really is awful and nobody has a chance to beat USC or the Pac-10 must be pretty good for even two of the teams to have a chance against a team that will be ranked that highly. You can't have it both ways. And by the way: USC is not Auburn! They will not begin the year ranked #1 and lose five games. We all know that it is possible that they may lose one game - as that has happened in twice in the last three years. Oh, and four losses in four years. So, the odds on more than one loss aren't that good.
Tommie Trojan
Clippers beat Spurs said:
posted on March 8, 2006 11:28 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The first 3 games will be Verrry interesting.
Arkansas is among the best homefield(s) in the country (ATS, Im in Vegas, I think that way) and return a lot of key players. They'll likely be one of the Most Improved teams this coming season.
Nebraska did well, it'll be Calhoun/Nebraska's 3rd season in the system, theyve shown improvement. Their Recruiting Class for last year (best in a few yrs) will have a definite Impact in 2006.
Arizona, Mike Stoops have been building a nice group of talent in his 2/3 years (pepper w/JUCO experience). Defensively, Arizona's been about middle of the road in the PAC... but offensively??? dismal... but now they got a Gunslinger-type QB Willie Tuitama, looks promising for AZ, a real Leader. Arizona will atleast be an upper-half-Conference team, largely improved.... and its gonna be against those three wild cards that USC's new Backfield will be tested early. I expect scores like:
@ Arkansas, 23-16
Nebraska, 27-10
@ Arizona, 21-13
They'll be great early tests... Arizona St, Oregon, Cal Berkeley, Notre Dame all at home & most of em later in the season is a good thing.... btw, historically, a good portion of the SEC-PAC matchups were O State & Wazzu playing exclusively @ Tenn, @ LSU, @ Georgia, etc... not too many Miss State's & Vandy's @ PAC matchups.
Bleed Crimson said:
posted on March 8, 2006 11:57 PM — 72.146.27.191 — link — abuse?
SoCalClippers:
To answer to your "chicken and the egg" scenario, using common sense musnt strength come before hype. look at usc, ill be honest and say that i dont think that i had never heard of usc before they started whining about not getting to go the NC game. After that, ESPN started building USC up. Now its also interesting to note that after ESPN started "sucking USCs d***" and creating the "hype," all of the top-notch recruits started flocking to USC. So that a very average football team and program grew into a superpower that i dont see ever going away so long as there is a pac10 and ESPN. You also admit that all great football towns are in the south with the exception of Detroit (i agree). You also admit that nobody in the country cares as much about football as the SEC (i agree). Come on just admit it were the best in college football, period (i agree).
so...
strength=hype=more strength=more hype (catch-22)
and it keeps on growing until someday you have a conference like the SEC.great programs in:
Pac10-USC
ACC-Miami, FSU, almost VT
BigXII-Texas, Oklahoma
Big10-Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan
SEC-Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Florida, almost AuburnACC/Pac10/BigXII=BCS conferences
SEC/Big10=best conferences (presently the SEC being the best)Auburn/Virginia Tech=schools with ugly colors, schools that i hate, and are wannabe big timers
Mooka said:
posted on March 9, 2006 1:07 AM — 68.6.189.197 — link — abuse?
I am overwhelmed here. One ata time hunh. I only have time to reply to one right now but I'll be back for the rest of you...
Tommie T I don't think anyone in SEC really hates USC. I know I respect them. I'm glad Pete Carroll agrees they should be in our league and I look forward to watchin the SEC whip that A** proper. LOL
As for next season well, I'm definitely not saying those teams are tough by SEC standards, just for the simple rivalry that they have against USC. I do think Oregon is definitely worthy to beat USC that late in the season. Furthermore Booty won't have Bush pushing him in the endzone this year against Notre Dame, and we all know no matter how garbage CAL is they can always pull an upset against USC. My call stands and USC will lose 3 late in the season. Sorry Trey, you will lose a lot of money in Vegas this year.Mooka said:
posted on March 9, 2006 11:28 AM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
Well, as for your wonderlic I guess it would appear to have the SEC a pretty balanced conference, but then again you wouldn't have so many power houses. In my opinion what makes a great conference is the wide range of programs that can step up in any given year and win a NC. In the SEC I see 6 or 7 teams that can step up and take the NC. 6 or 7 possible contenders is a HUGE number you have to admit. Again, the main thing that makes SEC football great is you never know which team it will be that will step up that given year. Never bet on a SEC game! Never! That goes for you too Trey. In other conferences I'd say it's preeety darn predictable to see who will walk out on top. Wouldn't you agree?
Big 12 Fan said:
posted on March 9, 2006 12:04 PM — 204.137.64.101 — link — abuse?
Bleed Crimson, your conference analysis is laughable. The simple fact that you do not include Nebraska as among the Big XII's powerhouse programs is quite the oversight. I think 5 National Championships, countless conference titles and Heisman winners, one of the biggest and most loyal and electric fan bases in the sport all demand that the Huskers be among the best programs in the nation. I'll let others speak for your oversights among the other conferences but your assertion that the SEC has the most "great" programs is a joke.
Mooka said:
posted on March 9, 2006 2:53 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
Trey,
Are you illiterate? When did I say Aizona St will lose by 30? I didn't even say Arizona would lose by 30. If that were the case I guess I could see why you think I'd lose in Vegas. Anyway, after you proof read and do what ever you need to do to get it right why don't you tell me something backing up your opinion that Neb will not lose by 20 along with Washington St by 30. Do you think Neb is good? That will be something new for me if that's what you think, but hey, it's your opinion.
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 9, 2006 9:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Bleeding Tide;
Geezus! I found the Epitome of the mis-guided, SECentric Hypster.
Lol... should I assume you were joking about not having "heard of USC before"...? Are you 12 years old? new to this country? Or just another pompous SECer spewing hyperbole.
... Never heard of "Tailback U", huh?
... or the 5 Heisman Trophy Winners before Leinart or Bush ever Started a game
... or of the most SIGNIFICANT Rivalry ever in the sport; USC-Notre Dame (accounting for 20 Titles between em; not hype when its validated, get it?).
... Dopey, the Top Notch Recruits were already coming; No.1 Recruiting Class in 2003, ya know BEFORE the season was played. How does your lil theory hold up there? - in this case the it was a Reptile's "egg"... before "chickens" existed. Aaaand, the USC Over-Hype only began in the 2005 season (when it wasNT validated, losing to Texas that yr)Moron, 2005 the SEC is Rated FIFTH (4th in '04)!!! They finished with the WORST Record among the 5 major confs!!! and youre claiming that its "presently... the best"!!!
THAT is H-Y-P-E... you goofball.
... and on top of everything else, you dont have good taste!... The Auburn "Blue" Unies are the coolest looking in the country! (excluding the helmets) VTech's are 'bland' at worst.
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 9, 2006 9:26 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Bleeding (from the head) Tide;
What "admit"? I'm making "Claims" and backing em up with some data... the Claim wasnt that "all great football towns are in the South" you twisted half-wit... it was that "Piss-Towns" care about the sappy stuff like *bleeding* their school's colors, "supporting" them even when they s*ck (like communists {joke}).
Ohio State, in piss-town Columbus, same thing and NOT in the South...
Penn St-College Park State Station, Nebraska-Lincoln, Oklahoma-Norman, Oregon-Eugene, Wisconsin-Madison.Theyre ALL PISS-TOWNS, is the point. (the exception is 5-Million-Pop Detroit/AnnArbor, were Michigan has a "bleeding" fanbase)
Teams/Fans in MAJOR (southern) CITIES like Atlanta, Miami Houston, Dallas... and NYC, Philly, Chicago, The Bay, DC, Boston, Phoenix, Tampa, Cleveland dont have that "Mentality"... Big City Detroit has self-image issues. Seattle and Los Angeles are somewhat in the middle; Big City mentality but with still a decent "draw" - even during the dismal Paul Hackett days, USC averaged about 60,000 (middle of the road when compared to Miami, GTech and Penn State, Tennessee). Washington/Seattle is similar.
Ive made my claim - the biggest disparity between the SEC and the PAC is NOT on the Field but in the "bleeding-ness-osity" mentality of their fanbases.
So Cal Clipprs said:
posted on March 9, 2006 9:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka
Then youre not talking about Conference Rankings/Ratings. That agian is a skewed view, 12-team conferences, etc... that is, you going by amounts, as opposed to percentages & soforth. But what youre talking about is your "opinion of what makes a great conference"... thats fine, as long as you realize that youre not talking about Conferences' strength, Top-to-Bottom (ei, SEC was rated 5th in 2005, 4th in 2004).
But the Wonderlic question was supposed to demonstrate the point that "parity" or lack of it, within a conference DOESNT determine the Conference's Strength (in it of itself)... Aaaaand by extention, that Everything is REALATIVE - the only way to even TRY TO ATTEMPT to produce a Confenrence "Ranking" is by accounting for how a conference did against teams from OTHER Conferences... and even then, the relatively small sampling that we have(each team having about 3 or 4 OOC games), only gives us a "murky view" of the Conference Comparisons (er, Rankings).
By the way, Cal Berkeley 2004 was about as good as Auburn... just a bit less depth.
Trey said:
posted on March 10, 2006 8:25 PM — 162.40.92.57 — link — abuse?
Mooka, sorry about the misread re Arizona State. I was reading fast and just so shocked by your post. Do I think Nebraska is good? Um, of course Nebraska is good. Yes the transition under Callahan took 2 years. Big deal. It was one of the most drastic transitions in NCAA history from a power option offense to the WCO. But really... have you forgotten who Nebraska is? Do you really think that Cal and Oregon are better teams than the Big Red? If so you are even dumber than I thought. Nebraska would destroy either Cal or Oregon by 30 points at least and they will give USC a hell of a better game than 20 points. You want reasons, ok let's see, their new Head Coach has had time to settle in (an NFL Head Coach by the way who led a team to the Super Bowl) and gain the respect of the players, they had a top 5 recruiting class last year and top 20 this year, they have a much much improved and seasoned quarterback returning with a canon of an arm in Zac Taylor. Stepping up at running back will be Marlon Lucky, one of the most highly recruited 5 star RB in the nation that everyone wanted last year. They return one of the best defenses in the nation last season and they play in a conference that is far and away better than the pac 10 or the sec. I'm not saying that Nebraska is back to where they have been or will be, nor am I saying that they will beat USC. But you are a fool for not giving them more respect than you do.
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 10, 2006 8:59 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Conference Records of Pac-10 teams between 2000-2005. Now remember: most all of these teams are horrible, right? After we're done doing this we'll begin to break down what the Pac-10's record is against other BCS Conference schools. Then we'll have a real clear picture of how the Pac-10 stacks up against the SEC or any other conference for that matter.
1.) Southern Cal 37-11
2.) Oregon 33-15
3.) Oregon State 26-22
4.) UCLA 25-23
4.) Washington State 25-23
6.) California 22-26
6.) Washington 22-26
8.) Arizona State 20-28
9.) Stanford 19-29
10.) Arizona 11-37Who would have thunk that ASU would be 8th? Man, I've always considered them to be a pretty decent team. Yet, they have only managed a 20-28 record in the Pac-10. We'll see how well they've done OOC. I'll bet it's a lot better than they have while playing in conference.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 10, 2006 9:32 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Arizona State's (8th Pac-10) accomplishments since 2000 against other BCS Conference schools.
2000 Boston Col.(7-5) 31 ASU(6-6) 17 @ Honolulu
2002 Nebraska(7-7) 48 ASU(8-6) 10 @ Lincoln
2002 N.Carolina(3-9) 38 ASU(8-6) 35 @ Tempe
2002 Kansas St.(11-2) 34 ASU(8-6) 27 @ San Diego
2003 Iowa(10-3) 21 ASU(5-7) 2 @ Iowa City
2003 ASU(5-7) 33 N.Carolina(2-10) 31 @ Chapel Hill
2004 ASU(9-3) 30 N'Western(6-6) 21 @ Evanston
2004 ASU(9-3) 44 Iowa(10-2) 7 @ Tempe
2004 ASU(9-3) 27 Purdue(7-5) 23 @ El Paso
2005 LSU(11-2) 35 ASU(7-5) 31 @ Tempe
2005 ASU(7-5) 52 N'Western(7-5) 21 @ Tempe
2005 ASU(7-5) 45 Rutgers(7-5) @ PhoenixJust as I suspected. Arizona State would put up a better fight against other BCS conference schools than they could in the Pac-10. Arizona State would go 6-6 in these games while outscoring the opposition by 29.4 to 29.2 over this span. ASU would play four teams with ten wins or more and get to play against only two bad teams (both North Carolina). Most of the rest of the competition was pedestrian, but on the other hand, ASU never achieved a better mark than 9-3 themselves - and won all three noncom games that year. Arizona State has won six of the last seven games against other BCS Conference schools, averaging 37.4 along the way, with the only loss being a nail-biter against a great (11-2) Louisiana State team in 2005.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 10, 2006 10:28 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Washington accomplishments against other BCS schools between 2000 to 2005:
2000 Washington(11-1) 34 Miami(11-1) 29 @ Seattle
2000 Washington(11-1) 17 Colorado(3-8) 14 @ Boulder
2000 Washington(11-1) 34 Purdue(8-4) 24 @ Pasadena
2001 Washington(8-4) 23 Michigan(8-4) 18 @ Seattle
2001 Miami(12-0) 65 Washington(8-4) 7 @ Miami
2001 Texas(11-2) 47 Washington(8-4) 43 @ San Diego
2002 Michigan(10-3) 31 Washington(7-6) 29 @ Ann Arbor
2002 Purdue(7-6) 34 Washington(7-6) 24 @ El Paso
2003 Ohio St.(11-2) 28 Washington(6-6) 9 @ Columbus
2003 Washington(6-6) 38 Indiana(2-10) 13 @ Seattle
2004 Notre Dame(6-6) 38 Washington(1-10) 3 @ South Bend
2005 Notre Dame(9-3) 36 Washington(2-9) 17 @ SeattleClearly, Washington has fallen on hard times over the last two years. Nevertheless, they win five of twelve games and get outscored 23.2 to 31.4, against a brutal schedule. Washington would play five teams with ten wins or more and one team with nine wins. Only Florida, so far, has played a noncom schedule as difficult as this one has been.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 10, 2006 11:08 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
California (6th Pac-10) accomplishments since 2000 against other BCS Conference schools:
2000 Illanois(5-6) 17 Calif.(3-8) 15 @ Champaign
2001 Illanois(10-2) 44 Calif.(1-10) 17 @ Berkeley
2001 Calif.(1-10) 20 Rutgers(2-9) 10 @ N.Brunswick
2002 Calif.(7-5) 70 Baylor(3-9) 22 @ Berkeley
2002 Calif.(7-5) 46 Michigan St.(4-8) 22 @ E.Lansing
2003 Kansas St.(11-4) 42 Calif.(8-6) 28 @ Kansas City
2003 Calif.(8-6) 31 Illanois(1-11) 24 @ Champaign
2003 Calif.(8-6) 52 Va.Tech(8-5) 49 @ Phoenix
2004 Texas Tech(8-4) 45 Calif.(10-2) 31 @ San Diego
2005 Calif.(8-4) 35 Illanois(2-9) 20 @ BerkeleyThis team is the disgrace of the Pac-10. A weaker schedule you could never play. They played three decent teams and lost all three times. Nevertheless, a 6-4 record while outscoring the weak opposition 34.5 to 29.5 along the way. I say send them to the Big Sky Conference where they belong.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 10, 2006 11:38 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Washington State (5th Pac-10) accomplishments against other BCS schools between 2000-2005:
2001 Wazzou(10-2) 33 Purdue(6-6) 27 @ El Paso
2002 Ohio St.(14-0) 25 Wazzou(10-3) 7 @ Columbus
2002 Oklahoma(12-2) 34 Wazzou(10-3) @ Pasadena
2003 Wazzou(10-3) 47 Colorado(5-7) @ Boulder
2003 Notre Dame(5-7) 29 Wazzou(10-3) 26 @ South Bend
2003 Wazzou(10-3) 28 Texas(10-3) 20 @ San Diego
2004 Colorado(8-5) 20 Wazzou(5-6) 12 @ SeattleAnother team that will not take on too many other BCS opponents. Only Alabama can match Wazzou in the least number of games against other strong teams. Still, 3-4 while being outscored 23.9 to 25.9 against this stiff competition is decent. Not a real bad team in the bunch and no games played in Pullman. Three of the seven opponents had ten wins or more and Wazzou comes away with a big win over Texas. They also should have taken Notre Dame in 2003, but alas, the game was played in South Bend. Always tough. A fair showing but Washington State should schedule some more stiffer competition all the way around.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 11, 2006 1:06 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Oregon State (3rd Pac-10) accomplishments against other BCS schools between 2000 and 2005:
2000 Oregon St.(11-1) 41 Notre Dame(9-3) 9 @ Tempe
2002 Pitt(9-4) 38 Oregon St.(8-5) 13 @ Phoenix
2004 LSU(9-3) 22 Oregon St.(7-5) 21 @ Baton Rouge
2004 Oregon St.(7-5) 38 Notre Dame(6-6) 21 @ Phoenix
2005 Louisville(9-3) 63 Oregon St. 27 @ LouisvilleWow! Only five games played against other BCS schools in six years. The greatest ducking and dodging act yet. A 2-3 record against pretty stiff competition while being outscored 28.0 to 30.6 in these games. I don't think Oregon State can gain any respect like this. They'll have to schedule more games against BCS competition.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 11, 2006 2:02 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Oregon (2nd Pac-10) accomplishments against other BCS schools between 2000-2005:
2000 Wisconsin(9-4) 27 Oregon(10-2) 23 @ Madison
2000 Oregon(10-2) 35 Texas(9-3) 30 @ San Diego
2001 Oregon(11-1) 31 Wisconsin(5-7) 28 @ Eugene
2001 Oregon(11-1) 38 Colorado(10-3) 16 @ Tempe
2002 Oregon(7-6) 36 Miss.St.(3-9) 13 @ Eugene
2002 W.Forest(7-6) 38 Oregon(7-6) 17 @ Seattle
2003 Oregon(8-5) 42 Miss.St.(2-10) 34 @ Starkville
2003 Oregon(8-5) 31 Michigan(10-3) 27 @ Eugene
2003 Minnesota(10-3) 31 Oregon(8-5) 30 @ El Paso
2004 Indiana(3-8) 30 Oregon(5-6) 24 @ Eugene
2004 Oklahoma(12-1) 31 Oregon(5-6) 7 @ Norman
2005 Oklahoma(8-4) 17 Oregon(10-2) 14 @ San DiegoLooks like a pretty tough road as Oregon takes on four teams with ten wins or more and another two with nine wins. Three big wins over Texas, Colorado and Michigan teams. Overall, Oregon goes 6-6 while outscoring this opposition 27.3 to 26.8 over twelve games. Oregon looks solid and took on many very good teams.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 11, 2006 4:42 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka,
Responding to #227, there have been 7 different PAC teams that have played in BCS Bowls.
- Cal Berkeley NOT being one of them, arguably "shoulda" been in 2004
- Arizona NOT bein one of them, finished 11-1 in the first BCS-season (12-1 after Holiday Bowl Win over Nebraska)
... I dont know what that does to your interpretation of 'great conference' but just thought I'd point that out.Mooka said:
posted on March 13, 2006 1:04 AM — 68.6.189.197 — link — abuse?
Socal,
Real close to what I'm talking about as for a Great Conference, but not exactly. Yes the Pac had 6 or 7 for BCS bowls, but hey, even Florida St made one of those last year. What I'm talking about is an actual NC. If you had 6 or 7 teams in Pac-10 actually competing for a NC appearance I don't think the PAC-10 conference as a whole would look as could hence, SEC.
Trey,
Maybe Neb will be in the top 15 next year, and of course I know they were good in the past. What I'm talking about is recent accomplishments. Unfortunately Neb hasn't been much competition in the Big 12. The Big 12 Championship was played by Tex and a very sloppy Colorado team. If Neb was so good why weren't they playing Tex in that championship instead of that sloppy team? You say they are ready, well I guess we will see. In my opinion their 'transition' with the new coach is not quite complete.
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 13, 2006 10:37 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
UCLA (4th Pac-10) accomplishments against other BCS Conference schools since 2000:
2000 UCLA(6-6) 35 Alabama(3-8) 24 @ Pasadena
2000 UCLA(6-6) 23 Michigan(9-3) 20 @ Pasadena
2000 Wisconsin(9-4) 21 UCLA(6-6) 20 @ El Paso
2001 UCLA(7-4) 20 Alabama(7-5) 17 @ Tuscaloosa
2001 UCLA(7-4) 41 Kansas(3-8) 17 @ Lawrence
2001 UCLA(7-4) 13 Ohio St.(7-5) 6 @ Los Angeles
2002 UCLA(8-5) 38 Oklahoma St.(8-5) 24 @ Stillwater
2002 Colorado(9-5) 31 UCLA(8-5) 17 @ Pasadena
2003 Colorado(5-7) 16 UCLA(6-7) 14 @ Boulder
2003 UCLA(6-7) 6 Illanois(1-11) 3 @ Pasadena
2004 Oklahoma St.(7-5) 31 UCLA(6-6) 20 @ Pasadena
2004 UCLA(6-6) 35 Illanois(3-8) 17 @ Champaign
2005 UCLA(10-2) 41 Oklahoma(8-4) 24 @ Pasadena
2005 UCLA(10-2) 50 N'Western(7-5) 38 @ El PasoUCLA goes 10-5 while outscoring this pedestrian opposition 26.5 to 23.2 per game. Here is some bias for you. In 2001, UCLA goes 7-4 (4-4 in Pac-10) with wins over Alabama and Ohio State, and does not go to a Bowl Game? Say what? Four losses in the Pac-10 will do that. You can't be any good and lose four games in the Pac-10, right? Some fairly good opposition here with some dogs thrown in.
So, including UCLA now and the other 2nd to 8th Pac-10 teams (all included because they have all won at least ten games in one season since 2000), the record of these Pac-10 teams against other BCS schools is 38-35 while barely being outscored 27.5 to 27.8 per game. Now, we're leaving USC out to make a point so far. Remember, the SEC's BIG SIX, was 35-34 while outscoring the opposition 24.1 to 22.2 per game. Not much difference - is there? So without USC figured into the equation, the Pac-10's 2nd thru 8th rated teams, have a better record against other BCS conference schools while the SEC's BIG SIX hold a 2.2 higher average margin of victory. When all is said and done - we'll add up the SOS of the schools that each conference has played outside of their own conferences. That should be interesting also.Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 13, 2006 3:03 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Great Moments in Pac-10 History:
The year was 1970. USC had just lost several players to the NFL and would struggle to a dismal 6-4-1 record, including 3-4 in conference. What a pathetic team? On the contrary: USC would beat Iowa 48-0, Alabama 42-21, Notre Dame 38-28 and tie Nebraska 21-21.
Now, Notre Dame would enter that game on a 16-1-1 run, before bowing to the Trojans. Notre Dame would reel off another nine in a row, before losing to another 6-4-1 Trojan team, 28-14 in 1971. Notre Dame would finish 1970 ranked #2 in the country.
And, Nebraska would enter their game with USC on an eight game winning streak before being tied, go on to win twenty-three more games in a row, before finally falling to UCLA 20-17 in 1972. This Nebraska team would finish #1 in the country in 1970 and is generally regarded as the greatest team of all time.
How can a team that finished 3-4 in the Pac-10 cause so much damage to other Top Ranked programs from around the country? The answer is simple: it's because the Pac-10 is the weakest conference there is and USC is the only good team in it! Right?Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 13, 2006 3:38 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Southern California (1st Pac-10) accomplishments against other BCS Conference teams since 2000:
2000: USC(5-7) 29 Penn State(5-7) 5 @ E.Rutherford
2000: USC(5-7) 17 Colorado(3-8) 14 @ Los Angeles
2000: Notre Dame(9-3) 38 USC(5-7) 21 @ L.A.
2001: Kansas St.(6-6) 10 USC(6-6) 6 @ L.A.
2001: Notre Dame(5-6) 27 USC(6-6) 16 @ South Bend
2002: USC(11-2) 24 Auburn(9-4) 17 @ L.A.
2002: USC(11-2) 40 Colorado(9-5) 3 @ Boulder
2002: Kansas St.(11-2) 27 USC(11-2) 20 @ Manhattan
2002: USC(11-2) 44 Notre Dame(10-3) 13 @ L.A.
2002: USC(11-2) 38 Iowa(11-2) 17 @ Miami
2003: USC(12-1) 23 Auburn(8-5) 0 @ Auburn
2003: USC(12-1) 45 Notre Dame(5-7) 14 @ South Bend
2003: USC(12-1) 28 Michigan(10-3) 14 @ Pasadena
2004: USC(13-0) 24 Va.Tech(10-3) 13 @ Landover
2004: USC(13-0) 41 Notre Dame(6-6) 10 @ L.A.
2004: USC(13-0) 55 Oklahoma(12-1) 19 @ Miami
2005: USC(12-1) 70 Arkansas(4-7) 17 @ L.A.
2005: USC(12-1) 34 Notre Dame(9-3) 31 @ South Bend
2005: Texas(13-0) 41 USC(12-1) 38 @ PasadenaMan, a 14-5 record overall while outscoring the opposition 32.3 to 17.4 during those games, and including a ten game winning streak. That's domination! USC would play seven teams with ten or more victories and four others that would post at least nine.
Adding USC's records to the other Top Seven Pac-10 teams would give you a record of 52-40 while outscoring the other BCS conference schools 28.5 to 25.6 in those games. It would also appear that USC's defense would be the best overall along with the offense. To conclude, the Pac-10's top eight teams are far superior to the SEC's top six teams, if record and winning margin were the only criteria - and certainly not average. We'll add in SOS later on and see what that looks like.Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 13, 2006 6:51 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
I just put up the USC chart and we got beat by Kansas State (6-6) and Notre Dame (5-6). That Trojan team was only 6-6 themselves. Those weren't your best Duck teams anyway at 7-6 and 5-6. Heck, even Indiana has to get one once in awhile. I believe they beat the Trojans 14-13 in the Rose Bowl way back in 1967 or so when "The Juice" was playing ball. So, if that Trojan team could lose to Indiana - I suppose just about anyone could. How they stopped OJ, when a whole police force and district attorney's office could not, is beyond me. Just shows you how tough Indiana can be when they want to.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 13, 2006 7:00 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Mayor:
My bad! We lost to Purdue 14-13 in the 67' Rose Bowl and beat Indiana 14-3 in the 68' Rose Bowl. Nevertheless, Purdue is pretty close to Indiana, isn't it? I remember it was pretty embarrasing back then. We've had many other fine moments also. I remember we won a National Championship in one year, but came out in the 1st game and got clobbered by Missouri of all teams, something like 46-25. That was the wake-up call. They never lost another game. A couple of years back it was a 10-6 loss to Utah in some crappy bowl. Pete Carroll's 1st Bowl game. How pathetic was that? 10-6? Oh, and let's not forget how we got pummeled by Fresno State many years ago when they were mere "pups". I think that cost someone his job or it should have. Every team plays a "stinker" once in awhile. Even really good teams do.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 13, 2006 9:53 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Arizona and Stanford (Pac-10 Doormats) accomplishments against other BCS conference schools since 2000:
These two schools have been a disgrace to the Pac-10 heritage. Stanford not so bad at 3-7 while being outscored 19.7 to 28.6 in these games. Stanford did get a couple of nice wins over Texas and Notre Dame. Arizona was an awful 0-6 while being pummeled to the tune of 13.0 to 36.0 per game. Arizona needs to go back to the Big Sky conference or wherever it is that they came from.
So, the Pac-10 finishes up 55-53 while outscoring other BCS conference teams 26.8 to 26.5 from 2000 to 2005.
Meanwhile remember, the SEC was 52-56 while being outscored 24.4 to 24.9 by other BCS conference teams over that same time span.
One myth has been resolved. While each conference played in 108 games each over six years: the SEC teams played an average of 1.5 BCS teams per year and the Pac-10 teams played an average of 1.8 BCS teams per year OOC. The SEC teams would play usually eight conference games and three noncons while Pac-10 teams would play seven conference and four noncons. So, the notion that the SEC would schedule more "cupcakes" than the Pac-10 is misplaced. Pac-10 teams are doing it just as often as anyone else is. This is all being forced upon us by our wonderful BCS Rating System - which so thoroughly punishes for losing any games.
Other than that, it looks as though the Pac-10 has a slight edge in winning percentage along with a better scoring ratio, while SOS has yet to be determined. But, for now, the Pac-10 is holding down a slight lead over the SEC for the title of: "Best dang conferance, in these gosh darn neck of the woods, by golly"!Tommie Psycho Trojan
Tommie Psycho Trojan said:
posted on March 14, 2006 1:49 AM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Well Mayor, Duckman, SC Clip, AZ:
I just got the report that the "Mad Cow" disease certainly was found on a farm in Alabama. I am afraid that it certainly must have entered the food supply in "that neck of the woods". The government is frantically trying to put a lid on it and reassure all Americans that no harm has actually been done. But, we all know differently, don't we? This would certainly explain some of the convaluted rantings and logic that follows whenever a faithful follower of the Tide or Dayum War Eagles gets the idea that reality may soon be on the way. I understand that the disease will make you stark ravin' mad to the point of never really even wanting to be sane again. Poor souls. I sure hope that Auburn can get by Temple and Tulane at least and that Alabama can somehow manage to squeak by LA-Monroe, Duke and Florida International (they have no hope against Hawaii). These poor innocents of the "Mad Cow" disease certainly deserve some joy in life before they go.
Tommie Psycho Trojan
So Cal Clipps said:
posted on March 19, 2006 5:49 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, so using your definition of 'great' conference (we're not talking about Conf Strength)...
Georgia = the Conf CHAMPS ends up with 3 LOSSES
Auburn = loses baaad to (5-3/BTen) Wisconsin and (5-3/ACC) Geo Tech
LSU = lost to a 5-6 team!
Bama = aka "Field Goal U"
... the SEC didNT even have ONE Real Title Contender.Real Trojan fan said:
posted on March 20, 2006 12:36 PM — 198.236.64.22 — link — abuse?
USC is going to murder every team they are going to play. They might have lost Leinart, Bush, White, and more, but they're still going to take everything. Their hardest game are the last 4, but their new recruits will show them why they are trojans. The national title is ours baby!!
Real Trojan fan said:
posted on March 20, 2006 12:38 PM — 198.236.64.22 — link — abuse?
USC is going to murder every team they are going to play. They might have lost Leinart, Bush, White, and more, but they're still going to take everything. Their hardest games are the last 4, but their new recruits will show them why they are trojans. The national title is ours baby!!
Mooka said:
posted on March 21, 2006 10:51 AM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
I've said it before and I'll say it again, if USC had to face LSU, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia and Tennessee all in the same season, I don't believe they would walk away from the season unblemished either. SEC's competiveness is their downfall on the whole outlook of their conference. I know you could understand what I'm talking about. You are right SEC didn't have ONE contender, they had 6.
BTW: Tenn was a very good team ranked top 10 in the country when LSU lost to them. I don't know what happened to them after that be/c I don't follow that program, but I could speculate they had QB issues(?). I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them competing next year too.
Martin said:
posted on March 22, 2006 1:48 PM — 128.186.53.204 — link — abuse?
I do think USC has been a great team. I do think the Pac-10 has been an easy conference. I do think USC has scheduled smartly, allowing themselves to develop as a team over the course of the year. What I see happening in the Pac-10 since USC's resurgance, is what happened to the ACC post 1991. When FSU joined the ACC, they dominated it, much like USC has managed to dominate the Pac-10. In recent years, FSU has managed to lose their complete dominance of the conference. That has something to do with the waning of FSU Football, and changes in the game, but it also has a great deal to do with the ACC. The presence of a team of the caliber FSU proports in the ACC has forced better play from the conference as a whole. Now, the ACC is one of premier conferences in College Football. USC, has had some trouble defeating all teams in their conference, even at the peak of their talent cycle. Of course the Pac-10 has no future plans to expand the conference to add powerhouses like VT and Miami, but it is my hope, that the play of the Pac-10 will better its caliber more and more, so that the West is on a more level palying field with the East. I guess my point is the recent dominance of USC will not neccessarily last, as FSU has helped make its new conference a better contender for itself and the rest of the country.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 27, 2006 9:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, youre delusional (and a bit rock-headed)
Every single team in the SEC was fatally flawed and NONE were a real Title Contender (not this past yr anyway; 2005). Yeah youve said that before about USC facing a SEC schedule (back in post 210... I reponded in post 219). The hypothetical list of SEC opponents you gave... NO One in the SEC faced THAT Schedule... this is another example of the mis-perception (er, OVER-HYPE) that occurs with the 12-team conf/10-team conf Disparity. SEC, you dont Face everyone else in your confernece, pay attention.
Georgia's the 05 SEC Champs right?... How about using Geo's schedule as comparison/reference with USC:
Based on the AP/Coaches Poll Rankings combined...
USC's Schedule --- Georgia's Schedule
1 Texas [LOSS] --- 5 West Virg [LOSS]
10 Notre Dame ----- 5 LSU
12 Oregon ------- 13 Auburn [LOSS]
15 UCLA ------- 14 Florida [LOSS]
25 Cal Berkeley
... and versus their only Common Opponent;
USC-Arkansas 70-17 --- Georgia-Arkansas 23-20So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 27, 2006 10:07 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, since you dont follow College Football, lemme inform you just how Bad Tennesseee actually was...
They were quite literally a Slip-in-the-End-Zone (and a PAT) away from being forced into Overtime by UABirmingham! in their first game of the season!... Tenn barely, baaaarely got past Memphis, AND that was a Memephis team WITHOUT Stud RB DeAngelo Williams !!! (injured)
You using 2005 Tennessee as a "tough team" example is laughable.Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on March 28, 2006 3:21 PM — 63.245.175.208 — link — abuse?
Note to Tommy Trojan- I read your post on "most hated" and i have to say i agree and disagree to some parts. dont blame Callihan for the west coast offense, it was the athletic directors doing. As for Frank Solich, i have heard that he was doing some extra caricular activities with the ladies... not to mention his heavy drinking that got him into trouble more than once (passed out at the wheel on the side of the street). To mention that Nebraska was a hybrid of Texas Tech is kind of Ludacris though, the lined up in shotgun perhaps 40 plays all year, and i havn't seen a fullback in Ttech's gameplay in over 4 years; as for nebraska however, we have slipped away from the power-I and the speed/power-option but we still have the twin TE set with FB every now and then... and we ran ONE option play all year! w00t! i think that next year will show however that we will line up in Shotgun more often(taylor is very dangerous with a 4 reciever set) also, Marlon Lucky is fast enough for the outside run game while in shotgun. Cody Glenn is strong enough for the inside run game from shotgun, and the "new guy" Kenny wilson is the best transfer pass blocker in the nation... as well as being built like jerome bettis and the speed something close to Willie Parker. You may be right about Callihan not being able to use his players right, but with the talent of next years players... i dont think even i could mess up. Husker Fans may not yell the loudest, may not boast the most, but are definatly the best. As proof, consider this. It's been 40 some odd years since the Nebraska Stadium hasn't been sold out, We travel better than any other team, we have the record for longest Bowl apperences (for 4 more years at least, as long as michagan doesn't nosedive) dont be surprised if you see a large amount of Red in the stadium this year. O.K. the tirade is done :)
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 28, 2006 8:03 PM — 204.62.104.209 — link — abuse?
Martin, nice theory, post 258, but...
Since 2002, kicking off their Dynastic run, USC has faced 17 Top 25 teams (AP/Coaches Poll) from in-Conference and out-of-Conference. Thats exactly as many as the BigTEN Champs & SEC Champs have each faced collectively (for those corepsonding yrs), the XII faced 16. USC has faced TEN Top-10-teams... the XII Champs, SEC Champs, BigTEN Champs, each faced Only SEVEN in that span...
Sure USC has been Dominating the PAC, but they've been Dominating the COUNTRY. Book-ended by two "hunt-cair-close" Losses to No.1 Texas and to No. 6 Kansas State (2005, 2002), USC playing Out-of-Conference has beatin an ACC Champ, has run over a couple of BigTEN CHamps, and utterly destroyed a XII Champ (and a few other ranked teams; Auburn, Colorado, couple of Notre Dames)USC has Eleveated the play of EVERY Team in the COUNTRY using your theory... not just the PAC.
The FSU/ACC analogy is cute-n-all but it doesnt exactly fit... 7 different PAC teams have been Represented in BCS-Bowls!... a total of 12 PAC teams have finished ranked Top-10 this Century. Thats one less than the XII, equal to the SEC, two more than the BigTEN, and more than DOUBLE as many as the ACC in that span (AP/Coaches Poll since 2000).
Gerald said:
posted on March 29, 2006 10:35 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers:
When did USC play the SEC champs? NEVER. Auburn was 9 - 4 in 2002. The SEC champ was UGA, who won the Sugar Bowl over FSU. Auburn was 8 - 5 in 2003. The SEC champ was LSU, who won the Sugar Bowl over Oklahoma. In 2004, USC did not play an SEC team, and the SEC champ was undefeated Auburn. In 2005, USC played 4 - 7 Arkansas, not SEC champ UGA.
And did USC play more ranked teams than LSU in 2003? Ummm, OK, just tell me who those ranked teams were. Did the PAC - 10 have a single ranked team other than USC in 2003? And USC played more ranked teams than Auburn in 2004? Again, outside of the total complete sham Cal team, who were they? USC did play more ranked teams than did UGA: 5 (Cal, Oregon, UCLA, Notre Dame, Texas) versus 4 (LSU, Auburn, Florida, West Virginia). That is pretty much the only truthful claim that you have made. And even that is a hollow one, especially when you consider that Cal was ranked despite not beating a single winning team. Again, CAL WAS RANKED DESPITE NOT BEATING A SINGLE WINNING TEAM. I would take UGA's victory over Georgia Tech, who beat Miami and Auburn on the road, over that fraud Cal program whose only victory over a ranked team in the entire Tedford era was against, well, USC! Yep, beat USC in the same year that they lost to Utah, Colorado State, and 6 - 7 UCLA. Wow ..
Mooka said:
posted on March 29, 2006 5:36 PM — 138.163.0.43 — link — abuse?
Well SOCAL,
From Gerald's post it looks like USC has done a pretty good job avoiding playing SECs best. How could you truly claim to be the best????!!!!! You can't, so stop. USC has played more teams that mirror Tenn team last season than any other top 10 team I know. Your points are invalid and as you put it, rock headed.
BTW:
I didn't say I don't follow college football, I said I don't follow Tenn program. From the way they played last year they should be thrown in the PAC-10.So Cal said:
posted on March 29, 2006 9:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald and Mooka,
Just to clear things up; were you under the impression that I "SAID" that USC had beaten an SEC Champ? (I suggest you Re-read posts 261 & 264 if you were) 'Cause I didnt.
Also, the comparisons I made of USC's schedule (based on AP/Coaches Rankings) compared to the Champs of other Conferences was make clear Martin's reference (post 258) using his own theory.So Cal said:
posted on March 29, 2006 9:48 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, regarding this thread... Post 256... Post 261:
My responses are to Posts that are mis-guided, that are just mis-informed (a`la Martin's post) or that try to down-play USC's accomplishments (Mooka & Gerald's posts)... ESPECIALLY when that person Posting DOESNT have a Comparison/Reference Point to make Their Dopey Claims! Make the Comparison Work!
Refresher: In their run since 2002, USC has faced 17 Top 25 teams, 10 Top 10 teams, complied a 48-4 record... If what I say is so "invalid" quickly, someone come up with a list of the "oh, so many teams" that have faced a better level of Opponents AND that have done as well as USC has in that span overall...
What's Invalid is your incredulous attitude about USC and the team's accomplishments in comparison to other teams (even other contenders).So Cal said:
posted on March 29, 2006 11:09 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald, 1978:
12-1 USC faced 7 Ranked Teams
11-1 Bama faced 4 Ranked Teams
... 1978 ended up as a Disputed Title ~ The 2003 USC/LSU Disputed Title isnt the debate here...
Its about the overall perception of USC's opponents/accomplishments during their run.
... and me using "AP/Coaches Rankings" is using your own ammunition, sort-a-speak. Ive always said the "Polls" provide only a partial view of the entire CFB landscape, at best... and are too often based more on external "Biases" than on teams' actual ACCOMPLISHMENTS for that particualar season (er, objectivity).But anyway, the point is that USC's accomplishments compare (favorably) to any of the other Contenders out there (even using the somewhat flawed Poll-based-criteria logic)... The idea that USC has had a much easier time than most other contending teams is plainly FALSE.
- USC, 2002-2005 faced 17 Top-25 teams, 10 Top-10 teams, had FOUR Losses
- Texas, 2002-2005 faced 13 Top-25 teams, 7 Top-10 teams, had 6 Losses
- Ohio State, 2002-2005 faced 15 Top-25 teams, 9 Top-10 teams, had 8 Losses
- LSU, 2002-2005 faced 18 Top-25 teams, 9 Top-10 teams, had ELEVEN (11) Losses!Looking at if from a more data-oriented, objective perspective, Consesus SOS Ratings:
USC 2002 - No. 1 SOS (clear cut)
USC 2003 - No. 30-something SOS (if memory serves)
USC 2004 - No. ~15~ SOS (give or take)
USC 2005 - No. ~17~ SOS (give or take)
... I think maybe only Oklahoma has faced a collectively tougher SOS than that, among the short list of "Contenders" in that span.
----- side issue, ignore if you must -----
Examples of the Problems/Biases with using "Polls" as the reference point for Rankings, SOS, etc:
2004 Florida was the crux of the entire SEC Over-hype that year, "ranked" 25th/26th by the Polls... but were actually "RATED" about 36th (that is, in terms of accomplishments/Wins and Losses, Not Hype, Not regional or traditional Biases... they were one of the worst 7-5 teams that yr, horrible SOS; 7-5 Oregon St, Purdue, aTm all had tougher rated SOSes, were all Rated higher, but Ranked lower - "Florida" was a bigger "name"). Conversely, Arizona State Ranked 19th/20th by Polls... but were actually "RATED" 13th!
This season; Auburn "Ranked" 13th-tied, but actually "Rated" 20th... Oklahoma "ranked" 22nd but "rated" 14th - a little payback to Oklahoma for making the Media/Polls look so bad last year maybe? (Orange Bowl, 55-19).The Mayor said:
posted on March 30, 2006 12:53 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Mooka and Gerald,
Sorry that "I Dream of Jeannie" was cancelled, quit living in the past. Get over it.
You guys consistently blow off any facts or theories other than those that promote the SEC. If a Pac-10 team rates in the Top 10 or 20, it's a "sham" (Oregon or Cal) but when an SEC team rates that high, they earned it??? I love how fast you throw Tennessee out with the bath water...I guess since they are only Pac-10 worthy, we should get their "deserved" national championship against FSU in the 1997 Fiesta Bowl?
You should view college football with an open mind and enjoy it for its entertainment value.
Gerald said:
posted on March 30, 2006 11:50 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers:
Cannot you get it man? I have consistently said that USC is clearly the best team in the country from 2002 to 2005. No other team is close. When have I ever said anything else BUT that?
But being the best team over a 4 year span does not mean that other teams were not better, as good, or at least comparable in a SINGLE year during that time! Case in point? TEXAS LAST YEAR! I am not saying that LSU was better than USC in 2002, 2004, or 2005. That would be crazy. I am only saying that LSU MIGHT have been as good as or better than USC in 2003. I am not saying that Auburn was as good as LSU in 2002, 2003, or 2005. I am only saying that Auburn MIGHT have been as good as USC in 2004. Geesh.
So USC beat Auburn in 2002 and 2003. Whoop tee do. Do you deny that USC would have beaten Texas in 2002, 2003, and 2004, back when they were getting humiliated by Arkansas, Texas Tech, Washington State, and Oklahoma? Nope. So, Texas WAS NOT a better team than USC in 2002, 2003, and 2004. They were only a better team in 2005!
In 2003, LSU beat Auburn, UGA twice, Arkansas (who beat Texas), Ole Miss (Eli Manning), and Oklahoma. Who did USC beat IN 2003 that comes anywhere close to that? Michigan? Wow. I guarantee you that Arkansas' Matt Jones would have run all over Michigan just like Vince Young did, and of course Eli Manning, the #1 pick in the draft who got the Giants in a playoff game in his second season (i.e. faster than Carson Palmer, and we are still waiting on west coast stars Joey Harrington and David Carr), would have outplayed John Navarre. And Navarre would have been a sitting duck for a UGA defense where almost all 11 starters are in the NFL.
2004? Auburn beat UGA, LSU, Tennessee twice, and Virginia Tech. Who did USC beat? Cal (blown out by Texas Tech after barely beating Southern Miss, seriously what has Cal EVER done under Tedford but beat a clearly flat and inexperienced USC?), Virginia Tech, and Oklahoma. Incidentally, where USC's top regular season opponents lost their bowl games, Auburn's top regular season foes UGA and Tennessee won theirs.
And after all this, please READ what I am saying and LISTEN TO ME. I have NEVER said that LSU was better than USC in 2003. I have NEVER said that Auburn was better than USC in 2004. I only said that LSU played better teams than USC in 2003, and Auburn played better teams than USC in 2004, and for those reasons Auburn in 2004 and LSU in 2003 should be considered as similar comparable teams based on record, performance against elite teams, talent, and coaching (Nick Saban is doing a pretty good job with the Dolphins don't you think? And Auburn's coordinators Al Borges and Gene Chizik, who just won a national title against USC after containing Reggie Bush and has not lost a game since the middle of 2003 TO LSU).
But USC and PAC - 10 fans will not accept that. They want USC to be declared as clearly better than LSU in 2003 and Auburn in 2004 because, well, the bottom of USC's schedule was tougher than the bottom of Auburn's schedule. As if USC's dreg opponents Hawaii or BYU would have been able to block Nick Saban's blitzes or stop Cadillac Williams and Ronnie Brown. Or, they want to favor USC because they were better the previous years. Yeah, that really worked this year with Texas right? "We destroyed Oklahoma who shut out Texas in 2004, so we are going to beat Texas in 2005!" Remember that?
USC: #1 team in the nation from 2002 - 2005, perhaps the #1 college program in the history of college football. Auburn: might have been #1 or #1A in 2004. LSU: might have been #1 or #1A in 2003. That is all that I have ever said. That and the fact that where several SEC teams have contended for and won national titles since 1970 (1960? 1950?) Southern Cal is pretty much all the PAC - 10 (PAC - 8)? has had, with all due respect to Washington in 1991 beating 8 - 1 - 3 Michigan and UCLA in 1954 beating, well, whoever.
Mooka said:
posted on March 30, 2006 11:51 AM — 138.163.0.37 — link — abuse?
Mayor,
What you are missing is a beautiful fact that Tommie T/Duckman posted on the Floridas' schedule site. Basically he said (and proved) SEC dominated since the beginning of football till 1997. I like how it stopped abruptly at 1997. Here was my reply in summary:
I will acknowledge the SEC has been in a slump (since 1997) compared to what they were. However, look for them to be on the rise again as you can plainly see Alabama and Florida is back, not to mention Auburn is showing championship talent compared to what they were. In a larger scale of things, I would bet anything years from now you will be saying the same thing about the SEC in that they are the dominating conference as I'm sure they had slumps in the period mentioned before that they were the dominating conference. What it all comes down to is SEC is the best in football (not looking bad in the final four as well).There is one thing and one thing only I will give the PAC-10 and that is they schedule very wisely.
BTW: Mayor, I was j/k about Tennessee. If I had all the trading power in the world I wouldn't give them up to PAC-10. However, I did mean it when I said they played up to par for PAC-10 last year.
I love how we argue about this on every site.
Gerald said:
posted on March 30, 2006 12:03 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
The Mayor:
Again with the "living in the past" stuff. SEC teams went undefeated in 1993 (Auburn) and 2004 (Auburn), played for the national title in 1995 (Florida), and won national titles in 1992 (Alabama), 1996 (Florida), 1998 (Tennessee), and 2003 (LSU), and have not had a single year in which a team failed to win 10 or more games since, well, ever I guess. And that is not even including Tennessee in 1997, who would have won the national title had they beaten Nebraska and Washington State defeated Michigan. (Did not that Tennessee team beat Cade McNown's UCLA in UCLA?) So, precisely what PAST are you speaking of? This past season? You mean when the 2nd place team in the SEC went 11 - 2 with victories over Arizona State and Miami and when the 5th place SEC team beat the ACC champion? Right. I guess you can talk about that period of mediocrity between 1998 and 2002. Except that during that time the SEC champ beat conference champs FSU, Maryland, Illinois, and Donovan McNabb's Syracuse the Sugar Bowl. But I suppose that by the SEC's standards that is mediocrity, but then again it is in the past, so I am going to take your advice and not live in it.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 30, 2006 11:45 PM — 204.62.104.211 — link — abuse?
Gerald, we might be reaching common ground here...
But as far as me "not getting it" in this recent line-of-debate, if I'm right about USC's recent accomplishments, strength, schedule, etc... how about setting Mooka#256 and Martin#258(sorta) straight.
Gerald # 256, did you think that I "said" USC had beaten an SEC Champ? Why even mention it?
... LSU/USC 2003... I gave you the 1978 exampleGerald said:
posted on March 31, 2006 1:19 PM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers:
Yeah, I misread your comment where I THOUGHT that you said that USC beat the SEC champs; for that I am sorry.
But I essentially agree with Mooka and Martin. Let me tell you why. What is your standard for a tough team? I say that it is a major college team that wins 9 or more games. Some folks have accused me of being self - serving and arbitrary with that definition, such criticisms are fair. Still, pick your standard and we will go by that one instead. Until then let us use mine.
How many 9 win opponents did USC face in conference play in 2003? 0. In 2004? 1, Cal - Berkeley. In 2005? 2: Oregon and UCLA. A grand total of 3. Now suppose USC had played LSU's SEC schedule. In 2003 they would have played 4 quality SEC foes: UGA twice, Ole Miss, and Arkansas. In 2004 they would have played Auburn, UGA, and Tennessee: 3 quality foes. 2005? Florida, Auburn, Alabama, and Georgia. A grand total of 10. TEN! More than THREE TIMES the number that USC faced in PAC - 10 play!
Even if you account for things like the SEC total is inflated because of the conference championship game and the 12 team league, that really doesn't help USC's case, because in the SEC all top teams still don't play each other every year. For instance, LSU did not play a very strong Tennessee team that beat Miami on the road in 2003. Meanwhile, USC played ALL of the 9 win PAC - 10 teams from 2003 to 2005: they didn't duck a team like Oregon and UCLA in not having to play each other this year, or how Oregon didn't have to play a very strong Washington State in 2001.
The bulk of USC's tough games from 2003 to 2005 came out of conference: bowl games plus Virginia Tech and Notre Dame. Well had you been the SEC champion from 2003 to 2005, you would have played BCS games as well, so that is a wash. So, go ahead and raise the "USC with LSU's schedule" tough game tally from 10 to 13. Actually, it goes to 14, as LSU did not play in the SEC title game in 2004. You say that LSU did not play a quality regular season nonconference game in that time? That actually helps the SEC's argument: their major college nonconference games were all PAC - 10 foes Arizona, Arizona State, and Oregon State.
Now, USC played 8 quality teams from 2003 to 2005 and won 7 of them, and only dropped one game (in overtime) to a team that they should not have, and even that was to a winning team that won 10 games the next year. Great job, USC, clearly you were the best team in the country in that time period. But had USC played in the SEC, they would have had to play FOURTEEN quality teams from 2003 to 2005.
Could they have won 13 out of the 14, which is what it would have taken to have the same type of run in the SEC as they did in the PAC - 10? I seriously doubt it, especially when you consider that USC's mighty offense never scored more than 24 points against 4 and 5 loss Auburn teams (with even a lot of those points set up by big special teams plays and turnovers). By saying that, I am not disrespecting what USC did accomplished. I am not even disrespecting your PAC - 10 foes; only stating indisputable facts. I really cannot think of any team that would have had USC's streak in the SEC other than perhaps that 1992 - 1997 Nebraska team. Remember: that Nebraska team could defend running quarterbacks (Kordell Stewart and Charlie Ward) AND passing ones (Danny Wuerrfel, Peyton Manning), didn't drop games to teams like 8 - 6 Cal, and didn't need to hang on against 6 - 7 UCLA, 7 - 5 Arizona State, 8 - 4 mid major Fresno, and 3 - 8 Arizona, and did not need to come back from being down 28 - 3 at halftime to 3 - 8 Stanford.
Maybe you feel differently, and you have the right to your opinion. But SEC fans will always think differently. Claiming that USC would not have been able to defeat Georgia twice, the Matt Jones (taller, stronger, and faster than Vince Young) Arkansas team that thumped Texas in Austin, and Eli Manning's Ole Miss makes a lot more sense than claiming that 13 - 1 LSU or 13 - 0 Auburn would have lost to BYU, Hawaii, Colorado State, and 6 - 6 Notre Dame, does it not?
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 31, 2006 3:55 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald, first some Fact Checking:USC 2003 - THREE 9-Win opponents (1 In Conf)
10-Win Michigan, 10-Win Wazzu(In Conf), 9-Win HawaiiUSC 2004 - FOUR 9-Win opponents (2 in Conf)
12-1 Oklahoma, 10-2 Cal Berkeley(In Conf), 10-3 VTech, 9-3 Arizona St(In Conf)USC 2005 - FOUR 9-Win opponents (2 in Conf)
13-0 Texas, 9-3 ND, 10-2 Oregon(In Conf), 10-2 FUCLA(In Conf)**You didnt include USC 2002, SIX 9-Win opponents**
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 31, 2006 4:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Be a bit more clear...
USC compared to LSU's Schedule?
or USC compared to SEC Champs of 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 respectively.I count 13 9-win opponents for LSU from 2003-2005
and 11 9-win opponents for USC form 2003-2005
(... I'll make sure later)So Cal Clippers said:
posted on March 31, 2006 11:58 PM — 208.57.3.120 — link — abuse?
Yeahup, 2003-2005...
LSU = beat 9 of 13 Nine-Win opponents
LSU = 6 overall Total LossesUSC = beat 10 of 11 Nine-Win opponents
USC = 2 overall Total LossesLSU = 9-6**
USC = 10-2*Now what are you infering from THAT?!
This 9-Win opponents Thing is Whacky, but I'm playing along... a bit sorta like going by the amount of "Poll-Ranked Opponents" thing that I used (not exactly the most accurate representation either, but commonly/mis-guidedly used by others):
- USC, 2002-2005 faced 17 Top-25 teams, 10 Top-10 teams, had FOUR Losses: 7-3 vs Top 10
- Texas, 2002-2005 faced 13 Top-25 teams, 7 Top-10 teams, had 6 Losses
- Ohio State, 2002-2005 faced 15 Top-25 teams, 9 Top-10 teams, had 8 Losses
- LSU, 2002-2005 faced 18 Top-25 teams, 9 Top-10 teams, had ELEVEN (11) Losses!*USC minus 2002* = 11 Top-25 teams, 7 Top-10 Teams, TWO Losses overall... 10-2* (6-1 vs Top 10)
*LSU minus 2002* = 14 Top-25 teams, 8 Top-10 teams, had SIX LOSSES overall! (one of which was against a 47th-Rated, sub-.500 team)... 9-6* (4-4 vs Top 10)Looking at if from a more data-oriented, objective perspective, Consesus SOS Ratings:
USC 2002 - No. 1 SOS (clear cut)
USC 2003 - No. 30-something SOS (if memory serves)
USC 2004 - No. ~15~ SOS (give or take)
USC 2005 - No. ~17~ SOS (give or take)
... if you take Scoring Margin in to consideration, USC gains an edge (over LSU or Ohio State or Texas in that run)... Personally, Wins are Wins and Losses are Losses in terms of Assessing/Rating what teams have "Accomplished" (who they beat) and only consider Scoring Margin data for Prognosticating/Predicting future matchups.Gerald said:
posted on April 2, 2006 3:30 PM — 65.12.162.103 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clips:
Keep in mind, we are not comparing LSU to USC. We have already established that USC from 2003 - 2005 was better than LSU from 2003 - 2005 as any sensible person would. We are only analyzing whether USC could have won all those games with LSU's schedule.
And also, please do not pretend that Hawaii counts when measured up against Ole Miss, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and UGA, OK? If you are, then I am going to throw in LSU's victory this year over Division I - AA champs Appalachian State, who would beat Hawaii anytime anyplace.
But I give you Washington State, which was an egregious omission, as was Arizona State in 2003, especially since they beat very good Texas and Purdue teams in bowl games. So from 2003 to 2005, USC beat 9 out of 10 MAJOR COLLEGE 9 win opponents.
I could really parse you here, though. USC only played 2 teams from 2003 to 2005 that reached 11 wins: Oklahoma and Texas. You were 1 - 1. Was 3 - 0 against teams that won 11 games in 2003 alone, and then there was Auburn in 2004 for 4 - 0.
10 game winners? Add WSU, Cal, and Virginia Tech to your list, and you are 4 - 1 for a total of 5. But to LSU's list you would add UGA, Tennessee, Ole Miss, and 2 bowl opponents (OU and Iowa), for a total of 9. And keep in mind, that is only who LSU actually played. In order to replicate USC's feat with LSU's schedule, you would have had to have played in 3 SEC title games and 3 BCS games. So add Tennessee in the SEC title game and West Virginia in the Sugar Bowl. That is 11 games against teams that won 10 or more games, buddy!
You would have had to play 11 of those games to get to 3 straight title national title games out of the SEC play where you only had to play 5 such games. I just don't think that the team that barely got by Stanford, Fresno, and UCLA could have done it. But hey, we KNOW that Auburn, LSU, UGA, Tennessee, or any other SEC team could not have done what USC did, so that is really what matters. I am not saying that it COULD NOT have happened, as after all you did have Leinart, Bush, White, Jarrett, Smith, Byrd, a great line, and a good defense. I merely propose that I do not believe that you could have.
But tis your prerogative to disagree; I just wanted to let you know what we SEC fans mean when we say the SEC is tougher. Keep in mind: 3 of your regular season opponents that won 9 games or more were nonconference (Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Hawaii). NONE of Louisiana State's were. That just buttresses our point when we say that SEC fans don't need to play tough out of conference schedules because the SEC is tough enough. I personally disagree with them for saying that, but it is not as if they do not have any evidence. Even with the toughest nonconference schedule in the nation from 2003 to 2005, LSU's tough games still outnumber USC's, and when you raise it from tough game to elite game (10 wins) and games against national title contenders (11 wins) then it gets really ridiculous.
Mooka said:
posted on April 3, 2006 1:10 PM — 138.163.0.41 — link — abuse?
I actually have to disagree that USC was better than LSU in 2003. LSU beat the same teams USC beat that year by bigger margins and just had a better defense all around (not to mention they did win the Championship). Of course there is no way of knowing unless they play, but I just think that is more than a bold statement to say USC was better than LSU in 2003. I don't think anybody would have a problem admiting USC was better the other years though. They certainly will not be better than LSU this year.
Have a good day.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 3, 2006 1:18 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald, youre reaching all kinds of levels of whackiness.
Now its 10-win teams and 11-win teams...?
But you did say "major confs", Hawaii's out.Do you "believe" in Homefield?
USC faced 8 OOC Road games from 02-05
LSU faced...3?
... Auburn 2?
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 3, 2006 3:30 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
So IGNORING the first season of USC run, 2002 when they faced SIX 9-win Major Conf opponents, using YOUR criteria...
USC 2003-2005 beat 9 Nine-Win Opponents, had 2 Losses overall:
9-2 -- 81.8% as a measureSEC Champs LSU 03/Auburn 04/Georgia 05... beat 11 Nine-Win Opponents, had 4 Losses overall:
11-4 -- 73.3%If youre tryin to sneak LSU 05 in place of Geo 05... they beat 14 Nine-Win Opponents, 3 Losses overall:
14-3 -- 82.3%
even that, compared to USC's 81.8 is only half a percent difference... project it out to the same amount... and its essentially a statistically draw. [USC would not have lost to Tennessee(5-6), I can all but guarantee that]About this "barely got by" stuff...
- 05 LSU-ASU, 35-31... needed 14-give-away-Points on special teams blunders and a phanthom "Katrina Catch" for the game-winning TD against an eventual 4-4 PAC team (sympathetic officials)
- 05 LSU-Arkansas 19-17... Ark rated 70-something (only common opponent w/USC, remember 70-17?)
- 05 LSU-Auburn 20-17... OT game
- 05 LSU-Bama 16-13... against "Field Goal U"
- 05 Georgia-SoCarl 17-15... hmmm
- 05 Georgia-Arkanas 23-20... only common opponent w/USC... well, you know.
- 05 Georgia-GTech 14-7... next game GTech was killed 38-10 by Utah..."barely got by" stuff?... why not take a look at overall Scoring Margins, or the Home/Road factor while youre at it? I dont know about 9-win-opponents or LSU/Auburn/Geo but... USC from 2002-2005 outscored 17 Top-25-Opponents, plus all four losses, by an average of something like 37-18. And faced 8 OOC opponents on the Road, overall.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on April 3, 2006 9:22 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers: besides the LSU/ASU and UG/GT games, the rest were sec vs. sec. When SEC teams play each other they play harder, better, and are more determined. It's kinda like the nfl. You can never really tell which team will win an sec game, Alabama vs. tennessee this year was so close because those teams hate each other. If tennessee played everygame as hard as they play alabama, then you can add 3 more wins on the schedule. Same with vanderbilt beating tennessee this year, south carolina beating florida, mississippi st. beating florida last year, and many other sec upsets, the best one being damon duval's 45 yarder to beat #1 florida in 2001 for auburn. Even alabama was supposed to shut auburn down because of their great defense, but we scored 21 points on them before they even knew what was going on. We could have also scored 28 had prechae rodriguez not fumbled that ball on the 20. Overall, the pac-10 and any other conference will never have what the sec has, so all this arguing is stupid.
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on April 4, 2006 8:20 AM — 63.245.175.208 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clipper- its nice to have 3 years of that kind of domination eh? now imagine having 30 years of that same (more or less) kind of domination... oh yea, not to mention 35 years of consecutive bowl games... oh yea, and 34 years of home sell-out games, oh yea, having a ratio of 4/1 against top 25 teams (for 30 some odd years). All good things come to an end however... good things are just coming back for us though, i hope they stay good for you (except when we play u)
Gerald said:
posted on April 4, 2006 11:46 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clips:
Again, you keep trying to make this debate about something that it is not. I am saying that by any measure, LSU played far more quality teams from 2003 to 2005 than did USC. I am not saying not that LSU or any other SEC team was better than USC during the 3 year period of 2003 to 2005, or during the 4 year period of 2002 to 2005.
Now, your wanting to talk about 2002 does not help you. Why? Because that was the year that you all played 6 superior teams. Result? You lost to 2 of them. And was it not USC fans who were saying that the 2002 team was better than the 2005 team even before you lost the Rose Bowl? Pete Carroll himself, as well as Chris Dufrense (sp), the LA Times college football sportswriter, said the same. I personally disagree, however, the 2002 USC team had absolutely no running game and no offensive line.
If you were in the SEC, your 2002 schedule would have been just as difficult in 2003, 2004, and 2005, and you would have lost a game or two in 2003, 2004, and 2005 just as you did in 2002 (and for that matter as you did in 2003 when your schedule was MUCH EASIER ... Hawaii, yeah right ... and you lost to an 8 - 6 Cal team).
USC would not have been any less a team had they played in the SEC. They merely would have had a slightly worse record.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 4, 2006 1:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty Shaq, that particular line of discusion was about "close games" not distiguishing between in-conf or out-of-conf matchups... NOT brought up by ME (ei, Gerald mentioning USC's "close games" vs UCLA, F State, Stanford recently).
- bigger pictureSo Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 4, 2006 3:59 PM — 204.62.104.208 — link — abuse?
Gerald, so then you ARE comparing USC & LSU schedules, specifically - not Auburn 04, Geo 05, etc, right? Im not trying to "make it" anything... YOU havent made it clear YET! Im tryin to work with you here... This whole thing is way off...
- Posts 258, 264... first you limit USC's Run to 2003, and not 2002 when it actually began WHICH had been the claim in a tagent-issue/discussion that started THIS discussion; Martin's theory, etc
- Post 265... you jumped in thinking I said USC had beaten an SEC Champ. You mentioned LSU, Aurburn, Georgia. You incinuate that Im being untruthful(NEVER)
- Post 269, 272 (268 w/Mooka)... We seemingly agree, but you apperantly missed the essense of my claim: That ya cant down-play USC accomplishments/schedule in their run (nothing MORE)... you Mis-interpreted & then Re-directed the entire Issue! You never said USC or LSU was better, I never said it either. PAC/USC fans dont claim that USC was clearly better, dont discredit LSU's 03 Title, only defend USC's.
- Post 275... I thought you understood my claim
- Post 277... it becomes apperent that you didnt. You state that your criteria for quality opponents were being 9-win teams, then switched it to 10, 11-win teams when your claim, all beit whacky, wasnt as strong (Posts 278, 280).
- Post 281, 284, 287, etc... we were on diverging sreams of thought (though not necessarily in disagreement)
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 4, 2006 5:34 PM — 204.62.104.210 — link — abuse?
Gerald, really though, how the hell Im I "making it about something that its not" if Im using YOUR criteria: data on post 284... what part of that (top portion) do you contend is not accurate? You've not been consistant with the comparisions (is it LSU or SEC Champs?) even now! You mention LSU at the top of your post, then later give a more generic reference "if they played in the SEC"... WHO's Schedule? I just gave you the breakdown/comparision of the !SEC Champs! accomplishment each yr -vs- USC's 2003-2005... can you call that "favorable" in either direction.
... so was it about "LSU" then?
2003-2005:
LSU beat 9 of 13 Nine-win BCS teams, had 6 overall losses (incl 8-5 Florida, 5-6 Tennessee)
USC beat 9 of 10 Nine-win BCS teams, had 2 overall losses (incl 8-6 Cal Berkeley, the National Champs)
... is that all accurate? - correct me if I wrong on the data. Is that "far more quality teams"? And the ratios break down vs 9-win opponents... LSU 9:4, USC 9:1... so where's the data/reasoning/proof that substantiates your claim? Its all been YOUR criteria.Notice, for most of the past few posts Ive only posted data and/or Questions to you... I havent made any of my "claims" about USC's accomplishments or schedule/opponents.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 4, 2006 5:49 PM — 204.62.104.210 — link — abuse?
Rusty Shaq, so what are you saying?
The SEC = sandbaggersand anyway, any rivalry game can use that excuse.
9-3 ASU losing to Arizona, etcThe biggest disparity between the PAC and the SEC is with the fan-dom, not so much on the field (all things considered)... but this line of discusion wasnt about confernces, more about USC's accomplishments inparticular.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 4, 2006 5:59 PM — 204.62.104.210 — link — abuse?
Defensive Minded Nebraskan - its nice to have 5 National Titles eh? now Imagine having 11... blah blah, piss, pound pound (chest)...
Sept 16th, we'll see... how's Nebraska's D, truthfully? - how many returning Starters, talent level, etc...
Mooka said:
posted on April 5, 2006 2:34 PM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
SoCAL,
Okay PAC-10 is the best at everything okay. Because of USC who won only 1 championship in like 100 years that gives the entire PAC-10 a boost and now you can actually say that the PAC-10 conference is one of the greatest. Not to mention their win margins year after year are just so overwhelmingly astonishing. You can now hold your head up high and say they have had a winning tradition since the beginning. In fact, from now on I will just call USC the PAC-10. How does that sound? CONGRATULATIONS!
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on April 5, 2006 7:12 PM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Not sandbaggers, it's somethin you people out west don't understand. Next year i hope that Auburn, Ohio State, and USC all go undefeated and Auburn and Ohio State go to the fiesta bowl. I want to hear what every usc fan has to say when they get ripped off. It will make me happy.
Duckman said:
posted on April 7, 2006 5:35 AM — 66.223.208.241 — link — abuse?
Mooka and Gearld,
We have established two thing for sure. 1) Seine 1997 the record for PAC vs. SEC games played is 7-4 in favor of the PAC. 2) Winning percentages for the PAC and SEC against BCS competition is about equal since 1997. How is the SEC so dominant and the PAC so horrible is those are both facts?
Gearld seems to think that because the SEC has more teams with winning records that makes them better. He also seems to think that since the same teams are good year after year and can pull off 9 and 10 win seasons the SEC is a tougher conference. Wouldn’t those two facts combined with the two facts above prove that the SEC is much more unbalanced then the PAC? The points Gearld loves to point out clearly are not credible evidence of the SEC being more dominant because these teams did not get those records by beating PAC teams. IF the SEC had a better record then 4-7 against PAC teams and had a better winning percentage against BCS competition then Geralds argument would have a leg to stand on but they don’t so he doesn’t.
Mooka doesn’t research his statements or numbers so his arguments usually don’t justify a response.
The two most credible facts point to the FACT that the SEC is no better then the PAC. Would you agree or do you think that games played is not credible evidence? SoCal, Tommy, Mayor, and myself (mostly SoCal and Tommy) will often shred every statement made by either of you using relevant facts. So far Mook and Gerald have failed to return the favor. Hear is your chance. If your accusation that the PAC is weak and the SEC is a dominant conference you should have no problem shredding my statements with credible facts that are RELIVANT TO THIS POST.
I don’t think you can. That being said it is pretty obvious that the PAC has been a much more balanced conference throughout USC’s recent dominance. Week in and week out USC played tougher teams. Even by Gerald’s criteria USC played just as many 9 or 10 win teams as anyone in the SEC. Give USC the respect they deserve. They played grate football and (as long as they weren’t playing Oregon) were fun to watch.
P.S.GO DUCKS!!!
Mooka said:
posted on April 7, 2006 12:01 PM — 138.163.0.43 — link — abuse?
Word just in...USC should lose every game this year. I don't know how good their defense will be, but their offense is in trouble. I just read an article saying Dennis will be out for 2006 along with Reed. With Booty questionable to start and if even if he does start I don't know if you would want him to play anyway. I said before that they would beat Arkansas, but it looks like the tables have turned drastically. I pick USC to get slaughtered against Arkansas and with that they will be exposed and lose the rest of their games w/ the exception of Wshington. Of course this should spell doom for the entire PAC-10 as that was the PACs knight in shining armor. For all you optimist, well, I guess anything is possible. I wouldn't be surprised to see all of these guys start despite the news. However, they still won't be as effective.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 7, 2006 1:42 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty Shaq, were to begin...?
1st - Alabama has 10 Titles, and thats including their Joke-of-a-Title in 1973 and 1964.
2nd - I only brought that up (USC having 11 Title; pissing contest stuff) in reply to Nebraska guy taking a quasi-Shot at USC's bad stretch, bigger picture.
3rd - Why the animosity towards USC? And or "people[/teams] out west"? 2005 BCS #5 Oregon = Not in a BCS Bowl (but four teams Ranked BELOW THEM are in, including 22nd Ranked Florida St)... 2004 BCS #5 Cal Berkeley = Not in a BCS Bowl (but FOUR teams Rated below them are, including 21st Ranked Pittsburg)... 2003 USC No.1 in both Polls = NOT in the BCS Title game (SEC and XII teams are in)... 2001 Oregon No. 2 in the Polls = NOT in the BCS Title Game (Nebraska not even their Conf-Champs, is in).... it$ not alway$ about what$ right, the Bowl $election$ rip team$ off.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 7, 2006 5:04 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka,
What are you refering to? What have I posted that has given you that impression - that I say the PAC is the best - when, where?Most of my recent posts have been about dispelling the erroneous notion that USC's schedule has been "favorable" or "weak" or etc... since they've been on this 4-year Run. Again, 2002-2005 opponents:
- USC - 17 Top-25 teams, 10 Top-10 teams (FOUR Losses overall)
- Texas - 13 Top-25 teams, 7 Top-10 teams (6 Losses overall)
- Ohio State - 15 Top-25 teams, 9 Top-10 teams (8 Losses overall)
- LSU - 18 Top-25 teams, 9 Top-10 teams (ELEVEN Losses overall)From a data-oriented view - Consensus SOS Ratings:
USC 2002 - No. 1 Rated SOS
USC 2003 - No. 30-something? SOS
USC 2004 - No. ~15~? SOS
USC 2005 - No. ~17~? SOSSo Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 7, 2006 5:53 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, and also... regarding the debate about Conferences, the stuff coming from ME has been mainly about the SEC in particular, NOT being as dominant as their fans "think" they are on the field recently, and even to some(lesser) degree, historically.
- they refer to silly things like having "great tail-gates", "bleeding their school colors", etc
- they pound their chests about having huge sell-out crowds
- they over-hype each other's (SEC)teams and down-play other teams more so than any other conference does
- they discount the fact that conferences vary in the amount of members
- they discount the home/road dynamic, even as they hide behind their attendance
- they have an overall pompous, SEC-centric mentality about College Football
... just some food for thought...
In terms of National Titles on a team-for-team basis. Counting EVERY National Champ selected (all-time) by the widely recognized; AP, Coaches/BCS, Dickinson, Helms, CFRA, NCF...
1 BTEN - 39 Titles, 11-team Conf
2 PAC - 24 Titles, 10-team Conf
3 XII - 27 Titles, 12-team Conf
4 SEC - 26 Titles, 12-team Conf
... by a more conservative estimate, NOT counting Post-1936 NCF, Helms, CRFA Title selections...
1 BTEN - 11-team Conf, 29 Titles = 2.63
2 PAC - 10-team Conf, 17 Titles = 1.7
3 XII - 12-team Conf, 19 Titles = 1.58
4 SEC - 12-team Conf, 18 Titles = 1.5Going by current Division & Conference affiliations, about 1 of every 4 of the SEC's out-of-conf opponents have been NON-Division 1A teams (all-time)... as comparison with the PAC, about 1 of every 7 of the PAC's out-of-conf opponents have been NON-Division 1A teams -- I may be wrong though.
Historical heads-up matchups between the SEC and the PAC have resulted clearly in the SEC's favor, however, the homefield advantage has also clearly been in the SEC's favor... which is eerily similar to the win/loss ratio (almost identical if accounting for neutral, and not-so-neutral, Bowl matchups).
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on April 8, 2006 7:44 PM — 63.245.175.208 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers- I wasn't bragging up (that much anyways) Nebraska over USC i think they; along with 3-4 other programs epitomy NCAA football. However as for the Black Shirts, we lost 4 starters last year, Both safties, and both DT's.. Tierre Green moved to Strong Saftey (once a RB, and nickel CB) and we brought in 4 new highly touted DB's all whom will vy for starting spots (watch Andre Jones to be the Left CB with Zach Bowman at RCB) last year the Defensive line sub'd in and out alot (not because of lacking skill, but depth... remember they led NCAA in sacks and tackles for lost yardage) so the incoming Tackles have good experience... one in particular (cant spell his name, something like) Dunguro has the size and speed to become a very good shore up DT, he may not have the penetration skills that the DTs that went to the NFL from last year but i think he will definatly get double teamed. 3 LB's that had season ending injuries last year are back in the practice squad, Steve Octavien (injured first game of the year, last year) will definatly get noticed as he is improving even more and could get big 12 honors, and or awards. As for Free Saftey, if you seen the Alamo bowl last year, if you happened to catch the Special Teams play of Shantle as he went in 3 times in a row to tackle the punt returner before he even made 1 step (wrongly flagged once for it... no halo in college) he is probably going to end up with the starting FS job. so 4 starters lost (only 1 spot may hurt us, the loss of Bullocks ( i think however Tierre Green will take on that job well)) i think our Defense will be top 10 total, if we can consitantly get at least 100 (preferrably 150) yards rushing on offense we will definatly go to a BCS bowl (barring an injury from Zack Taylor). Cody Glenn is our Power runner (not getting a loss of yardage all year last year (as well as coming in on obvious short yardage runs) and our speedback is Marlon Lucky, whom if we can block for will run all over teams (probably more likely run all around teams) and something to be more excited about this year. The return of Matt Herien will open up the run game in ways no deep passing could, with possibly the best TE in the NCAA coming back after missing a whole year to a broken Femer and his ability to stretch defenses sideways, will open up many avenues for a RB to run... as long as he has the vision to see it. I know i was asked about Defense, and personally i think the Defense will be on par with last year... except for that double bogie to Missou, so i guess it will be better in the end of year stats, but i think husker fans will be showing the infamous "3 and out" hand gesture as often or more. Personally i'm more impressed with what the offense will be doing, especially the power run game.. in fact the run game in general. I know alot of teams that dont fallow Nebraska think that the huskers have forgotten how to run at all... the sad truth is, we were balanced all year, the run game just wasn't getting anything done for about 4-5 weeks is all; and not up to husker snuf at any time last year... except maybe vs Michigan when Cory Ross took it upon himself to get the yards(broken tackles, jukes, and fighting for every inch) at the hieght of what.... 5'6"
Defensive Minded Nbraskan said:
posted on April 8, 2006 7:53 PM — 63.245.175.208 — link — abuse?
Oh yeah, i feel the need to defend myself. I never spoke of how many Championship games we won. Only of the domination we had for soo many years, i ask anyone to find PROOF that any one team in any era (after players having to be... u know enrolled in the college playing) had the fan base, top 25 win ratio, and acedemic honors that nebraska has had the last 30 some odd years... even including the last few years
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on April 8, 2006 11:40 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
Here's the definition of the BCS:
The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) is a system which selects the college football matchups for four prestigious bowl games, called the BCS bowl games. The teams selected include the conference champion from each of the six BCS conferences plus two others ("at-large" selections). The top-ranked and second-ranked teams are pitted in the BCS National Championship Game in order to crown an UNOFFICIAL NCAA Division I-A national football champion. It has been in place since the 1998 season;
It crowns an UNOFFICIAL national champion. Just because USC got the bcs in 05 don't mean they were the best, it don't matter how many OOC games they play, how top 10 teams the other one plays, and all these other stats yall are coming up with, if the atlanta falcons came to college football for a year, and played all division II schools all year, would that make them worse than USC or Texas or whoever might be undefeated that year? NO! The way auburn played football that year would have been more than enough to beat USC. we had 4 players go 1st round in the draft, and 2 of them are already excelling in the NFL, and jason and carlos will be when they each get a full starting job. I can't wait for Auburn, Ohio State, and USC to go undefeated next year and USC get left out of the picture.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 9, 2006 3:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rust, most everyone understands that College Football has had a "mythical" Championship system all of its history, this BCS system included. We all accept that disputed Championships are part of CFB... the thing is 2004, wasnt.
NCAAsports.com, 2004...
Southern California : AP, BCS, Berryman, Billingsley, Colley, DeVold, Dunkel, Eck, FACT, FB News, FW, Massey, Matthews, NFF, NY Times, Sagarin, Seattle Times, Sporting News, WolfeNot one selection organization picked Auburn that year. The Falcons woulda been the best team on paper, but playing Div 2 schools wouldnt have PROVEN it.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on April 9, 2006 9:21 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
My only bias is to ESPN and what they said in 04, and 05. The only reason they even wanted auburn or usc to win in 03 and 04 is so the bcs would get thrown out, and THE PEOPLE'S POLL WOULD COUNT. The people who would be voting in this poll would be people who would vote for the teams they want in the national championship, instead of who should be. If it weren't for $$$, we wouldn't have a problem deciding who should play who, who is #1, who will play in the championship.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 10, 2006 2:36 PM — 204.62.106.215 — link — abuse?
Rusty, are you drunk?
You havent been coherent for the past couple of posts.
The 2001 Oregon thing, like I insinuated in post #298 and like Duckman said in #301... Auburn hasnt been the only team to "get skrewed" by the System. Why the animosity towards USC/PAC teams in that regard?Rusty Shackleford says: My only bias is to ESPN and what they said in 04, and 05...[blah blah]... If it weren't for $$$, we wouldn't have a problem deciding who should play who, who is #1, who will play in the championship.
The "money thing" has play !Against! PAC teams. I suggest that you direct your fervor elsewhere.
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on April 10, 2006 6:42 PM — 63.245.175.208 — link — abuse?
OUCH!! it looks like Hershel Dennis is out for the season... i feel for you USC, i hate when injuries take a player out... especially that kind of injury on that kind of player (torn knee ligaments on a cutting I-back) I know USC is full of depth, but losing Bush,White and now the #1 replacement has USC looking at Lb's to transfer to RB. Can anyone say spread offense with power running? it just sucks that USC lost 3 linemen :(
Mooka said:
posted on April 11, 2006 1:25 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
In regards to post 300, your best post yet. Can't argue. It also shows my point that the only conference that can actually compete with SEC is Big XII. I uderstand your arguement about road wins and so on, but you have to admit in the larger scale of things what we are talking about is wins/losses. If you leave that cut and dry there is no arguement.
Mooka said:
posted on April 11, 2006 9:21 PM — 68.6.189.197 — link — abuse?
From riches to ditches right Diggs the Mountie.
What do you think about that SoCal Clippers? Is the PAC in trouble this year now that the only NC hopeful is most def down?Duckman,
Don't give me any crap about your Duck's being NC hopeful either.
Have a good day.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 13, 2006 2:41 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
USC is still a Contender, just look around the country... who's coming back all that "Complete" from last season? Texas, Ohio State, etc, no one comes back as an out-right Power-Team.
Who the hell is Diggs the Mountie anyway, what's he know.Cal Berkeley is a legit contender too.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 13, 2006 4:05 PM — 204.62.104.218 — link — abuse?
Why do they keep coming?!
USC is already LOADED with Elite-Level Linebackers, what's going on here? Lets focus on getting some Linemen.http://usc.scout.com/2/519716.html
Chris Galippo
6'2, 235 lbs.
Servite H.S., Anaheim (CA.)
Galippo defines the term football player. He plays the game with great instincts and knowledge. Galippo combines great football IQ with a solid frame and surprising athleticism for someone his size. One of Galippo’s strongest points is his ability to slow the play down as it is happening... is always in a spot to make a play... he also starts in the slot at receiver... After watching film on Galippo, there are two names that immediately come to mind, Lofa Tatupu and Matt Grootegoed.It has been stated that the Trojans will only take two linebackers in the 2007 class, and I can’t think of a better way to get the ball rolling.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 13, 2006 4:37 PM — 204.62.104.218 — link — abuse?
Just gotta laugh... USC's 2006 backfield:
QB David Booty... Back (surgery)
RB Hershel Dennis... Knee (season's done)
RB Michael Coleman... Hip (recovering)
RB/KR Desmond Reed... Knee (recovering)
RB Chauncey Washington... Ineligible (has he even Enrolled yet?)
WR/ATH Whitney Lewis, #1 Recruit 4 Yrs ago... converted to 2nd-Team RB?
FB Brandon Hancock... converted to Starting RB?
LB Ryan Powdrell, JUCO-Stud... now converted to 2nd-team FB?... its hilarious, who's really THAT worried?...
QB Mark Sanchez... true Leader-type
RB Stafan Johnson... think: "Reggie Bush 2003"
RB Emmanuel Moody... think: "Hershel Dennis 2003"
DB/RB CJ Gable, #4 Recruit... fills in at RB if necessaryDefensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on April 14, 2006 12:38 AM — 63.245.175.208 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers- (317)Not 1 "power runner" has been succesfull against nebraska in the last few years... sure some plays he will get 3.. 4 yards. but other plays he will get negative.. 1 or 2 yards. I know that nebraska has new DT's so that is kind of irrelivent till proven the same (or better) from the starters this coming up year, but if a FB wants to muscle his way up the mid... i say let him try. Last year, the LB's had to account for A LOT of the running game and passing game, this year i think the secondary is up to the challenge of making the defense a lot more dynamic. i hope u USC has an awnser for this because its hard to win if u cant get the running game going (noted most previously in nebraskas preformance last year) good luck on that
Mooka said:
posted on April 14, 2006 10:40 AM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
USC is in trouble especially with Nebraska. These are all teams that have been waiting for the moment to find USCs weakness and it has never been so evident. They will jump em like a gang of voltures. From the looks of it USC will be lucky just to make it outa spring training. I've never heard of the players SoCal mentioned except for Johnson and Moody(and I've ever seen them play). No surprise, I sensed a cloudy laugh/shrug off from the USC angle. When you think about it, it's still not a bad deal for USC be/c at least there is no doubt they will be 2x stronger next year.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 14, 2006 2:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka and Nebraska
Think back this time 3 years ago... USC's projected Starting Backfeild 2003:
QB Brandon Hance (transfer student replacing Carson "Heisman")
RB Sophomore Hershel Dennis (accounted for 1 TD the pervious yr)
FB Sophomore Brandon Hancock (non-starter previor yr)
Matt Leinart took over the Starting job by the END of Spring... Reggie, LenDale werent even enrolled yet...
USC 2003?... National TitleUSC 2006:
QB Mark Sanchez, No. 1 rate QB of his class(personally prefer him over JDB)
FB/RB Brandon Hancock is a 5th-Yr SENIOR now! (experienced)
RB Stafon Johnson (highly touted RB recruit, like Reggie was)
Mooka youre telling be you hadnt heard of RB Chauncey Washington? He was Rated higher than LenDale White by some recruiting agencies... ATH Whitney Lewis was the rated No.1 recruit overall 3 years ago (by some)... not that they will contribute, but you must have "heard of them" atleast. And when you got Reggie and LenDale, its easy of guys like Coleman and Reed to fly under the radar.The only thing I'm coorelating to this season is that USC is in a similar situation in terms of backfield experience/talent AND that its not out of the question that USC will be a legit Contender - not that its a guarantee.
Nebraska has his breakdown on that particular game, but Mook your take comes off as a hater's "wishful thinking".
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 14, 2006 2:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Nebraska, you mentioned taht "power runners" in particular havent done very well against Nebraska's D - why? Is that to say that speedster-RBs have been effective against Nebraska? RB Coleman and FB Hancock are essentially USC's only two "power" backs... Stafon, Gable, Reed, Moody are more of the speester type... Chauncey, I dont know.
Mooka said:
posted on April 15, 2006 12:14 AM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
I feel sorry for you be/c you really sound in denial. Just admit it, your team is in trouble. We all know heisman RBs don't just pop up every year. I don't care how good USC is they can't pop another Reggie Bush outa their ass either. With that being said on top of inexperience I think USC will have a down year. I said it before and I'll say it again I hope they do go to the NC this year so I could watch the LSU Tigers pounce on that ass.
Defensive Minded Nebraksan said:
posted on April 17, 2006 6:34 AM — 68.13.180.209 — link — abuse?
So Cal- many reasons, The defensive line is predicated to taking running lanes then pass rush lanes in that order (or so it seems to me) so a DT would be on gaps 1-2, that leaves the DE's to the 3rd gap and line backers covering the edge. Our gameplan is kind of vanilla, with a great bull rish off the edges... speed doesn't always make a sack, but a bull rush either clogs a lane, pushes a lineman back (into the QB) or makes a play in the ball before its thrown. this leaves room for outside blitzes and if used properly a DT stunt with a LB inside blitz will throw off the blocking if its man... which it would probably be (based on 2 D-lineman needing to be doubled- also very important to our "vanilla blitz" scheme out of the 4-3). Simply put, we would rather clog the middle than stretch our defense too far. however, with the addition of Steve Octavion... that brings a whole new facet to the LB core, especially suited for "west coast" coverage, as well as the speed that killed us last year. If Mckeon (nebraska MLB) can keep up the work he has been doing in the middle, then that will leave octavion to play it by eye instead of being caught in Play Action. the use of our Linebackers next year will dictate exactly how far the team will go next year. The defensive line will do its part in getting tackles for loss, sacks, and clogging up running lanes... its the linebackers job to cover the outside game so that the secondary doesn't have to compensate... because any coach that i have ever seenlasting seemed to cover his weakness the most. which takes away from what a team can and cant do...
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on April 17, 2006 4:53 PM — 68.13.180.209 — link — abuse?
A note to the previous post: Nebraska's scheme is predicated on the secondary to be able to cover the run well.. with Tierre Green at SS i think that will be a BIG boost, he knows running lanes.. and he will get in the heads of the opposing runner. while time will tell if he handles the deep ball well, i do know one thing... wide hips, and an open stance will help ANY defensive player in coverage and tierre has what it takes there... Its all about whether he is able to take what teams will throw at him, but if he can, as well as Shantle at FS expect huge things for the Black Shirts this coming up year... i also know that teams will try to attack the safties... but if that doesn't work it goes back to running the ball... bcuz nebraksa WILL have in my eyes the best lock down corner tandem in the Big 12... can anyone say Cover 2 man under?? possibly with Tierre Green playing a yard or more up because of his speed to get back fast... which will make him able to jump routes. I just hope he doesn't miss the ball altogether, gotta go for the knockdown b4 the pick. -Defensive Minded Nebraskan (can anyone tell me the reasoning for the team 1 to beat up on team 2 during the spring game)
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 17, 2006 11:15 PM — 204.62.104.220 — link — abuse?
Nebraska, this is the kinda feedback/info Im looking for. I didnt realize they were No.1 in Sacks.
Looks like the relative strength of BOTH teams will be their Linebacking corps.
USC will have one of the most Improved Defenses in the Country... for one, Defensive Team Captian LB Sartz coming back from injury - Nebraska has LB Octavian coming back (projected Starter?, but injured 2005), as are most of their Sack-masters (DE Carriker, LB McKenon).
Nebraska's relatively Lame offense is in all likelihood, gonna be much better. USC's offense will be Largely inexperienced (the backfield mainly), but still ultra-talented.
... they both lose OUTSTANDING punters.How is Nebraska's O-Line compared to last yr? - key losses, experience, etc... because the improvement of their 82nd-ranked Passing Efficiency and 107th-ranked Rushing offense depends on it.
My biggest concern for USC (despite the inexperience in the backfield) is their O-Line Depth, however, the Starting lineup will be strong.It'll come down to USC's ablitiy to create Turnovers (best in the country at it, since Pete Carroll)... and their elite crew of WR/TEs; Dwayne Jarrett, Steve Smith, Fred Davis. Opponents wont get too many "coverage" Sacks with that crew (btw if its Sanchez at QB, he's a better-than-decent scrambler - from what I hear)... and oh yeah, its at the Los Angeles Coliseum...
... 24-10, USC
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 17, 2006 11:43 PM — 204.62.104.220 — link — abuse?
Mooka, what did I just post (in #320)?
In 2003, neither Reggie or Leinart were "Heisman" winners. In 2003, the eventual "Hesiman RB" was essentially a 3RD-STRINGER(105 Tot Rush/Rec plays)! behind Hershel(147 plays) and LenDale(147 plays). In 2003, WR Mike Williams, WR Keary Colbert, and LenDale all accounted for more Scoring than the eventual "Heisman RB". In 2003, as a matter-o-fact, the eventual Heisman "QB" hadnt even attempted a PASS in his career (his first Pass was a TD on the Road @ highly-hyped Auburn).USC's 2003 backfield did it as a Platoon... USC 2006 doesnt "need" a Heisman-level-RB to be a legit contender -- is the point here.
Mooka, I've expressed my reservation about USC 2006; O-Line Depth, the 3 early games @ much improved Arkansas, Nebraska, @ Arizona, backfield inexperience (the obvious one)... what "denial"?
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on April 18, 2006 6:01 AM — 68.13.180.209 — link — abuse?
I Offensive line lost 0 offensive line starters (except mayble LT) there is experience at the middle of the line more than the outside, but 3 players are coming back from injuries that held them back lask year. Murtha- the projected LT is a mammoth of a LT, at 6'8" or so... being 320 lbs, if he can get the speed of the game down and all the moves, he will be very good. Kurt Mann at center was perhaps the best in the big 12, as well as very smart A(3.9 in prep med...) as well as Dane Todd "iso FB"(4.0 in engeniering). the projected RG has been moving bodies around well... and we have good iso blocking. The line has been gearing up for a run mentality type of game... and because of that, they will compete with the best of the Big12... and possibly nation... if only the Huskers would to a split back (2 HB) with a TE..
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on April 18, 2006 6:12 AM — 68.13.180.209 — link — abuse?
-WTF- not to sound partial to Nebraska over USC :) but halting sales to "non season tickets holders" in the Nebraska USC game is kind of crazy, and underhanded. Now i know its hard to get tickets at a Nebraska game.. but its like that every home game, every year... but for USC to do it on a "non rivalry" isn't odd at all to me. They also do this to UCLA Notre Dame. Nebraska, as well as being one of the most traveled fan, we travel even better to games with great opponents... not many kudo points for the USC Athletic Director
Mooka said:
posted on April 18, 2006 11:23 AM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
Socal,
I do see your point, in that USC doesn't need a heisman level RB to compete. LSU certainly didn't have one in their 2003 NC. All they had was depth at RB. Depth is the key thing that will drive teams to the finish line, right... with that being said I just can't help but comment on how USC is running pretty thin in the beginning of the season. I'm not a hater of USC happy about this, it's just something I wanted to point out.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on April 27, 2006 1:42 AM — 208.57.3.120 — link — abuse?
Mark Sanchez arrested for sexual assault ?!?!?
Now this one is the biggest shocker.- Reggie and LenDale both leaving early... No Sweat, theres still quality talent to reload with
- JDB's back injury... ah whatever, the back-up gets some Spring-time reps under his belt and is probably a better QB any way; blessing in disguise
- projected Starting RB Dennis gets injured, maybe career-ending... still talent there, incoming freshmen should get more time
- Reggie's Family is discovered of POSSIBLY being involved in inappropriote dealings with an associate of an agent... keep it in perspective the school isnt really at fault here (meanwhile thinking: ungrateful, double-crossing bastard family)... Now QB Mark Sanchez, the clean-cut, all-american, Evangelical Christian kid from O.C. is arrested for Sexual Assault?!!!?
Did April Fools Day turn into April Fools Month or something?Nebraaska said:
posted on April 30, 2006 12:23 AM — 24.208.70.125 — link — abuse?
HAy what can i say but Zack Taylor is going to do good or if not its not going to be a good day for Nebraska or ME:( ....sc D will be good I will give old pet that.
So Cal Clippers What do you see for that game???
GO Huskers!!
husker jim said:
posted on May 3, 2006 11:03 AM — 24.252.16.210 — link — abuse?
Blackshirt defense will definitely have a chip on the collective shoulder, Offense w/ Taylor, Glenn, Lucky, Herian, Swift, Purify etc. will be looking to make a statement. My prediction is 28-14 Nebraska wins and makes the turn. The amazing thing will be how husker nation turns the L.A. colliseum into Tom Osborne/ Memorial stadium on gameday...............anyone know if espn gameday picking this game up?
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 8, 2006 8:42 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Nebraska, its gonna be a defensive battle (USC-Arkansas game might be a good preview); the LBs crews as the relative strength of both Nebraska and USC. To be concise, I see Homefield and USC's elite WR corps as the difference - see post #327
Defensive Minded Mebraskan said:
posted on May 9, 2006 4:43 AM — 68.13.180.209 — link — abuse?
I think Marice Purify is going to do for the Huskers what Steve Smith did for Carolina, so seeing 30 put up by the huskers is no bold leap. If Glenn gets the start... i see the huskers concentrating on I formation with PA, however if Lucky gets the start i think we'll be seing more shotgun "MidWest-coast Offense" with off tackle being thrown in with draws and Out routes... so i woulnd't know where to gage the opposing teams score based on Time of Possesion and i'm guessing USC will be passing more next season... prolly try to complement it with a power run game (dont see that happening unless USC's WR core runs like a 4.35 collectivly... too scare the safties soo far back they are taken out of the run game altogether (much like how the power-I of old used to keep safties out of the pass game)) OH YEA!! i think the game is going to be on ABC or something... i know its nationally televised
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 16, 2006 9:19 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
D-Minded Nebraska, that is a bit of a bold "leap"... Maurice Purify? Those JUCOs that come out of San Fransico CC are quality players, but to make a determination of an early game (vs USC, no less) leading with a guy that hasnt yet played a down at Nebraska...???
... and Cody Glenn's 2.9 Yds/Carry (2005) isNT "promising" enough to support your optimism - is he supposed to be your "Power" Back? yeah I know he only lost 1 yard all season, but 2.9 per Carry!?! That O-Line better be vastly improved.... remember, USC's LB crew will be the strength of the team.
Tomcat said:
posted on June 12, 2006 2:05 PM — 70.248.27.55 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal Looks like a pretty good schedule for the Trojans.Arkansas and Nebraska are both worthy opponents.Want to see a tough schedule check out the Rice Owls, TCU Horned Frogs and The Baylor Bears These teams have really tough schedules. The Baylor Bears in 05 went 5-6 which is pretty darn good, considering vicorties over Iowa State, SMU and Oklahoma State. They took A&M and Oklahoma into O.T. Guy Morris and The Bears are on the right track.TCU comes to Waco in September.
The Rice Owls play Texas, Notre Dame and UCLA
Hookem Horns Sic-em BearsSo Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 12, 2006 6:01 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, I dont think they compare overall. How about Florida, Washington, Tennessee, Cal!?
Rice @ FSU not Notre Dame.Washington:
@ USC, @ Cal, @ Oklahoma, @ Oregon, @ Arizona(very improved), vs ASU, vs UCLA(down yr), vs Fresno St(down yr)Florida: @ Auburn, @ FSU, @ Tenn, * Geo, vs LSU, Bama (down yr), So Carl, UCF (up-n-coming)
Tennessee: LSU, Cal, Florida, @ Arkansas (most improved!), @ Geo, @ So Carl
Cal Berkeley: @ USC, @ Tenn, Oregon, ASU, @ Arizona (improved), Minnesota, UCLA
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 5, 2006 11:24 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Weakest SOS among major conf teams has gotta be Kansas:
Avoids facing Texas, Oklahoma & TTech from their own Conf and their OOC opponents are So Flo, @ Toledo, Monroe, and Non-D1A State - to go along with @ Nebraska, CU, aTm, @ ISU, @ Mizzu, K State, @ Baylor & OK State.Weakest SOS among all BCS conf teams is probably West Virginia:
@ Louis, Rutgers, Maryland, @ Pitts, So Flo, @ Uconn, Marshall, Cincy, @ Mississippi St, @ East Carolina, Syracuse, East Non-D1A
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 6, 2006 11:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
brownrodeo88, you say "the proof is in the championships" ???
... the Big TEN has the most.
By some accounts, on team-for-team basis, the SEC is FOURTH All-Time in that respect!
The Sports Illustrated Almanac:
1 BTEN - 11-teams, 26 Titles = 2.36
2 PAC - 10-teams, 15 Titles = 1.50
2 XII - 12-teams, 18 Titles = 1.50
4 SEC - 12-teams, 16 Titles = 1.33
5 ACC - 12-teams, 11 Titles = 0.92See what I mean about 'perception' and the SEC hype.
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 6, 2006 11:05 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rice has a pretty tough schedule... for a mid-major.
Texas, @ FSU, @ UCLA (down yr), @ UTEP, @ UCF, @ Tulsa, Houston, UAB, SMU, East Car, @ Tulane, @ Army.Of course this is all based on projections of how teams will actually fair in 06.
Sandyunderpants said:
posted on July 7, 2006 3:28 AM — 66.229.160.187 — link — abuse?
You goofs don't have a clue. USC has had the #1 recruit class for 4 straight years. Their talent level is sick and their head coach has lost 2 games in the last 3 years by a total of 6 points, and one of them was the BCS championship game. They smoked Auburn 23-0 on the road, smoked Virginia Tech 24-13 on the road, Michigan 28-14, Oklahoma 55-19, Notre Dame 4 straight years. Booty is a Heisman contender this year and Moody, Johnson or Gable will be a Heisman winner in the next couple years, hell a program like SC has going is worth betting on that's for sure, at least they take on challengers in real divisions unlike LSU who are so chicken they schedule Division II wannabe schools like LA-Lafayette and Tulane. No wonder nobody recognizes their fake championship from 2003. How many Heisman's did that team produce? What kind of legacy followed that flukey fake title? Oh yeah-- Zip. Meanwhile SC came back and won a 2nd straight National Championship and followed the back-2-back up with an undefeated regular season and 3rd shot in a row at the big one, While LSU celebrated beating an over-rated multi-loss Miami team at the Peach Bowl. LSU's schedule is so flunky they just might end up with USC in the BCS title game, now that would be poetic justice, and it wouldn't be pretty.
Tomcat said:
posted on July 7, 2006 5:34 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
So Cal My mistake thanks for the correction.I agree with post #352 W.V. shouldnt have too much trouble.
#354
Gone are the Ken Hatfeild days of running the option. The new coach Graham has coached with Rodriguez at W.V. They will probably run more of a spread offense.The new offensive coordinator is Major Applewhite.He is a very intelligent young man with alot of knowledge and passion.This team should improve, however when looking at their schedule there are not any easy wins for the Owls. UCF,SMU, Tulsa and Houston have all improved and ought they to be good games.
The Arkansas Razorbacks have a pretty tough shedule as well.
TCU Frogs play Texas Tech and Baylor before going into conference play.
Baylor plays Washington State,TCU,Texas,Oklahoma and A&M Pretty tough
Hookem-HornsSo Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 8, 2006 4:21 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
SandyPants, neither USC nor LSU will be in the Title game this year, so no poetic justice will be served. And David Booty wont be a legit Heisman contender, not this season. He'll be worth mentioning as a contender for 2007, possibly.
And dont come with that "Nobody recognizes LSU's 2003 Title" kinda sh!t... cause when you do, its You that nobody will 'recognize' as credible.
Disputed Titles Happen.
No need to instigate that foolishness.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 8, 2006 4:38 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, I just recently found out about that/read up on Rice... Yeah Major Applewhite's the OC, he's in his mid-20s... Now thats gonna be troble-some for Rice 2006, the 1st year when theres a dramatic system-change like that; not a good thing if youre looking at the immediate future.
Arkansas? Aah, yeah they face USC but they avoid Florida and Georgia from their own conf... gets LSU, Tennessee, & Bama all at HOME.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 8, 2006 4:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TCU is dropping this season, wont match 2005's 11-1. I'm thinking San Deigo St will be on the "Upset War-Path" this season, and usually dont like picking upsets on the road but SD State just might drop TCU on the Road.
Tomcat said:
posted on July 8, 2006 6:20 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
So-Cal I might confer on post #359 TCU has Baylor,Texas Tech and BYU early in the season.Dont think they can survive the first two big ones. With Utah & San Diego games ought to be good ones as well.
Be sure and watch the Baylor vs TCU it was moved to Sun the 3rd and will be televised nationaly
HookemSo Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 9, 2006 7:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TCU is solid, but the Mt West is taking a collective "step up"; Chuck Long makes an immediate impact on SD State... weakling UNLV really beefs-up with quality Transfers from USC, Oklahoma, FUCLA at critical positions (watch their Pass-D)... both Utah & BYU have HCs now in their 2nd yr (UNLV aswell), so overall improvement should be expected.
If expectations hold true, the Mt West will have winning record against BCS teams, 7-6 is a possiblity this season...Utah @ FUCLA - W
TCU vs TTech - W
TCU @ Baylor - W
BYU @ Boston - ???
BYU @ Arizona - ???
SD St @ Wisconsin - W, my Upset Special!
UNLV @ Iowa St - ???
New Mexico @ Mizzu - ???
CSU vs Colorado - ???
Wyg @ Virginia - LOSS
Wyg @ Syracuse - ???
AF @ Tenese - LOSS
AF @ Notre Dame - LOSS
Tomcat said:
posted on July 11, 2006 1:41 PM — 70.249.42.40 — link — abuse?
So-Cal
Pretty good predictions, however Mike leach is scary,You never know which Tech team will show up.They air it out and can score quickley.
Iowa State over UNLV
TCU vs Tech ?
upset special Baylor over TCU
Missu over New Mexico
I think the Big XII should win most of their matchups with Mt W
Colorado vs C St. Hawkins has something to prove early still an in state rivaly game Ill give an edge to the buffs
I personally like the old SWC matchups
Like to see the Frogs beat the Red Raiders ought to be a good one. Hookem-Horns
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 12, 2006 5:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, I even give Texas-El Paso a shot vs TTech this season (@ Utep).
Reasoning behind UNLV @ Iowa St being a "question mark" game... ISU over-acheived defensively last yr, and UNLV was breaking in a new HC, another thing is that Iowa State could be caught "Looking Ahead" to @ Iowa the next week, and a bit of wishful thinking on my part (somewhat of a UNLV fan).So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 12, 2006 5:22 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
New Mexico beat Mizzu on the Road last yr. Its actually Mizzu @ New Mexico this yr (I mis-printed before), so theres a chance... its gonna be a nice little battle between the XII and the Mt West.
Who's the XII's most improved team gonna be? biggest drop off?
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 12, 2006 5:49 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, now as far as the Baylor and their Pts Proximity trend... Where do you get "11 pts from 8-3" from?
Baylor was 10 pts from 7-4 on the "close Losses" column, and remember its a double-edged trend, so-to-speak... Baylor also had one "close Win", so theres not "trend" its N/A for Baylor.And its NOT woulda, shoulda, coulda-Sour Grapes sort of talk, its about picking-up on trends, indicators, tendencies that "help" in PROJECTING results for the Next season.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 12, 2006 11:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The 2006 Picks
____________________
PAC Champs - Cal Berkeley
XII Champs - Oklahoma (over Nebraska)
BTEN Champs - Ohio St
SEC Champs - Tenese (over Auburn)
ACC Champs - VTech (over FSU)
WAC Champs - Reno
MtWest Champs - Utah
CUSA Champs - UTEP (over UAB)
MAC Champs - Toledo (over Kent St)
SBelt Champs - FAU
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 12, 2006 11:27 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The 2006 Picks
_____________________Rose Bowl - Ohio St over Cal Berkeley
Fiesta Bowl - USC over Texas
Sugar Bowl - Tenese over Louisville
Orange Bowl - V Tech over Iowa
Title Game - Notre Dame over Oklahoma
... and oh yeah, forgot to metion in the previous post...
BEast Champs - LouisvilleTomcat said:
posted on July 13, 2006 12:24 AM — 70.249.42.40 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal
Most improved ?
Texas A&M Baylor Oklahoma State
Your predictions are pretty funny
So you think Texas will lose two next year?
We only lost one in two years kinda the same record as USC
Way down- definetly USC with losses at Arkansas and then after Nebraska you will probably lose to Notre Dame yall wont even play Texas, However Ohio State and Oklahoma will, sorry guys your strech is over!
USC 3 or 4 losses
Texas undefeated Hookem-HornsSo Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 1:35 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Texas loses 1 or 2, yeah that about right... what "pretty funny" exactly?
Ohio St @ Texas is a toss-up, homefield gives em the slight edge (I'll play the odds on that one).
Oklahoma's gonna have a killer-D (granted, Texas too), Bomar's gotta be improved a bit, all-n-all a healthy Adrian Peterson is the edge.
... and THREE?! teams from the same Conference are all on your "Most Improved" list?? All from the Same division no less... wow.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 1:49 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Texas @ Nebraska isnt exactly a 'gimme'.
USC gets Nebraska at Home; USC will edge out the first three opponents @ Arkansas, Nebraska, @ Arizona, in close ones... but, even though theyre home games, USC loses to both Cal Berkeley & Notre Dame.When was the last time that a team lost a Heisman QB and a Heisman RB in one off-season?
And oh, by the way, another guy they lose is only the All-Time Career-Touchdown leader at Tailback U, LenDale White.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 2:02 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, I dont know about that brah... that Oklahoma Defense will be elite-level this season.
But I like Oregon's chances if, If, IF Jonathan Stewart validates his #1 Rated RB recruit-status (nullifies Adrian Peterson), and their Defense pressures Bomar enough to render Oklahoma offense one-dimensional.
If that happens, plus Homefield, maybe Oregon pulls it off.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 3:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Whitney Lewis! enrolled at Northern Iowa, HA-larious... this dude was supposed to be the Best prospect from USC's 2003 recruiting class; Reggie and LenDale are All-Timers... guys like Steve Smith, Sam Baker, Lo-Jack, Ryan Kalil are all All-American candidates and are all likely off to the (fugk the...) NFL after this season. Whitney Lewis, what happened?
Greg said:
posted on July 13, 2006 5:03 PM — 216.206.26.130 — link — abuse?
Mayor,
Here you go again dissin the OU team. Sept. 16th is coming soon. The ducks are going to have trouble with the Sooner D. This will be a difficult game for the Sooners, but just a warm up before the Sooners thump the horns.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 14, 2006 7:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, you say "Sooners own the Ducks, but we're due"... how about some deeper insight than that Mayor.
Whats the deal with Stewart? From what you've read/heard/seen is he about to break-out this season or..? Was he taken off the Special Teams, to be a full-time RB, no more Kick Returns for him? (Bad move if they do). It looks like Oregon's got a Top-Quality O-line this season, no excuses for Stewart.The Mayor said:
posted on July 14, 2006 8:56 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
That's as deep as I get. I just don't get into it as much as you guys. Also, I haven't lived in Eugene in 29 years.
I am into the flavor of the college game, the pre-game atmosphere, the tailgating, the history, wearing matching green and yellow as a grown man in his 50's (never a has been a fashionable color combination in any decade)and supporting my Ducks through thick and thin.
I have no aspirations to be a sports writer. Call me a lazy fan. I admire the knowledge that you display about teams from all over the nation. If I knew half as much about my job as you do about college football I'd be retired by now.
Still, only 50 days until the first Duck game, can't wait. By the way, most importantly, the Trojans still blow. Keep up the god work So Cal.
Tomcat said:
posted on July 17, 2006 3:34 AM — 70.249.42.120 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal whatever your name is, hello welcome to upset central. Thanks to Mayor- Bless you Man
You are very knowlegable however very nieve about CFB fans etc.
You fail to realazize that you are blogging on an SEC blog. You cant help it your so pro Pac-Ten & MT-Wst that it is ridiculous!
Texas vs Ohio State Texas Wins
TCU vs Baylor Baylor Wins
Arkansas vs USC Hogs Win
OU vs Oregon OU wins
Huskers vs USC who Knows? I hope Nebraska
California Bears in a real conference like Big XII or SEC would probably never go to a bowl again.That is the truth,put in your pipe and smoke it.
Big XII #1 and SEC #1 pac-10 # 10
Hookem-Horns Sicem-Bears Gigem-Aggies
Roll-Tide War eagle Pig- SooieSo Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 2:32 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat - The utter "Homer", making accusations about me, Ha!
This guy's Talking-Up Baylor! and gives no real reasoning behind it. Baylor of all teams... a team that since the existence of the Big XII has averaged LESS than ONE Conference-Win per season!
Whats ironic mean?
Honestly I dont know, maybe this is Baylor's year, maybe tomcat turns out to be right, great, whatever... Now, why is it that YOU are posting on an SEC blog/thread exactly ?!???? YOU Are THERE to talk about how Other People Talking there Shouldnt be there talking.
... bughala@Z$*(!o%?i*n#k$%
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 3:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, I dont know about Oregon this season. They got a Tough Strength of Schedule, it looks like. They get the three toughest in-Conf opponents and their Rivals on the ROAD! Fresno State may have Lost a sh!t-load of Talent but that game still might be tricky for Oregon on the Road the week before the Oklahoma game. Thats a Classic land-mine/look-ahead/trap-game, even if F State is "down" a bit this year. That monster Oklahoma D-Line is really gonna put highly-touted-RB Stewart and Oregon's exp O-Line to the Test.
Oregon should be pleased if they end up going 3-3 against @ F State, Oklahoma, @ ASU, @ Cal, @ USC, @ O State.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 3:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Picks 2006
____________________The Heisman list:
Brady Quinn
Michael Bush
Troy Smith
Adrian Peterson
...
Jamal Charles
Sam Keller
Drew Tate
Kenny Irons
Marshaun Lynch
Darrean McFadden
Steve Slaton
Chad Henne
Erik Ainge
.....
Longshots:
Willie Tuitama
Ted Ginn
Grahm Harwell
Zach Taylor
David Booty
Drew Stanton
Gary Russell (if he's back)
Garret Wolf & Jordan Palmer (token mid-major picks)
Chris LeakSo Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 10:52 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Picks 2006
______________________Contenders that are behind the Eightball (tough SOS):
Florida
Cal
Ohio St
USC
Tenny
Texas (sorta)Contenders with a promising Path (relatively weaker SOS):
West Virginia (Rutgers may be their toughest game besides @ Louis)
Iowa (no Penn St, Mich St; toughest OOC game, Iowa St)
Virginia Tech (no FSU, Maryland, NC St, (CCG?); toughest OOC, So Miss)
Louisville (thats despite facing Miami from OOC)
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 11:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
I dont know about that Mooka... but the Media in general over-hypes the SEC's "strength" as a whole (maybe not ESPN spec, havent noticed).
If I had to point to one 'team' in the SEC, its Florida. But then again theyre the one team in the SEC that arent as big of Road-Pu**ies as the the SEC collectively (somewhat).
Moox, good point about the Phila NFL/Eagle fans! See, THAT is true... Philly "NFL FANS" specifically, deserves the adulation, not Philly-fan in general. How many fans show up for Temple Football? Temple's like the only College Football team in a Miles around... they get what, 15K in attendance? Moox, you lived in Philly? do you have anymore insight... has the support been there (for the Eagles) thru the good times and bad times?AND as for RAIDER FAN!>?!? Thats another Farse!
Raider Fan is consistantly in the LOWER half of the League in Home Attendance! Matter-o-fact, since moving Back to Oakland, the Raiders have YET to consistantly draw as many fans as they did when they were in Los Angeles! To This Day!
Way too much hype surrounding "Raider fan". Sure they make a lot of noise around the country, but they gotta Validate it with butts in the seat, put their money(devotion) where their mouth is(match the hype).As for the Auburn "Scandal"!!!!!
... I dont give a shee, play on.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 11:37 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Picks 2006
___________________
Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #1:
Oregon State's RB Yvenson Bernard will be an All-American.Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #2:
Navy's HC Paul Johnson is named Coach of the Year.Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #3:
Mark Richt will be moving on to Florida State when Bowden steps down (down the line). Navy's Paul Johnson will take over at Georgia when its time.The Mayor said:
posted on July 18, 2006 2:56 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal
You suggest..."Oregon should be pleased if they end up going 3-3 against @ F State, Oklahoma, @ ASU, @ Cal, @ USC, @ O State."
I suggest that the Ducks will lose only to the Sun Devils (heat) and the Beavers (fog) this year...they win your other 4 picks.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 18, 2006 3:50 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mayor,I have to agree with you bro.This appears to be shaping up to be a great year for Oregon!Their O-Line is Huge.Average is 320 pounds and 6'5" tall!!D-Line is Huge.Average is 293 pounds and 6'4" tall!!Jonathan Stewart could have a breakout season.I think Dennis Dixon will come in and pick up where Kellen Clemens left off.At 6'4" and 196 pounds it wouldn't hurt to get about 20 more pounds on him.Cal,Oregon,and ASU will battle for PAC-10 top dog this year.USC loses too many playmakers on both sides to contend.Looking good this year Mayor.I'm out.HOLLA
So Cal Clips said:
posted on July 18, 2006 9:03 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, itll be tough... relative strength vs relative strength - Oregon's solid O-Line vs USC's/Oklahoma's/Cal's elite level D-Lines... Im taking the edge.
Then theres much improved Arizona, sandwiched between USC & Oregon St... carefull. Oregon is a 4-loss team.So Cal Clips said:
posted on July 18, 2006 9:31 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
USC's D returns enough, the Offense is the real concern. Talking about playmakers... Hello-Tee is gone (consensus 1st Team AA), Aaron Gipson is gone (lead the NCAA in INTs), Tony Trucks is gone (accounted for More than HALF the team's Sack total)... the Offense has pleanty of talent, but Kellen Clemens seemed to be a true leader/coach-on-the-field sorta guy, not easy to replace.
BTW, the USC losses arent that heavy on the Defensive side (Carroll's never had more than 6 Rtn Starters on D). Also, USC gets those three toughest in-Conf-Opponents at Home! (argueably they get their five toughest opponents at home; ND, Nebraska). USC will still "contend" but Cal will probably win it. Not starting Joe Ayoob is addition by subtraction - any average QB would make Cal better. Nate Longshore, should be over the broken leg, and is highly regarded... Cal's the team to beat.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 18, 2006 10:01 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The 2006 Picks
____________________I take back the second part of my Out-on-a-limb Prediction #3, I dont see Georgia running the option.
Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #4:
Arizona State's Defense DOUBLES its Total Sacks; from 22 to atleast 44 this season (infusion of Transfers/Jucos, DC in his 2nd season, and players returning from injuries).Tomcat said:
posted on July 18, 2006 11:10 PM — 68.91.91.48 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal You are right about UNLV getting alot of good transfers and the MtW is improving overall as a whole. TCU at Utah-The Utes look good in this one however Im pulling for the Frogs. The Tech vs Utep game should be an air out matchup. T Tech-Wins The Utep coach wishes he had Bamas recruits.
Tech visits TCU this ought to be another good one.
In reference to post #385 Iowa has Ohio State at home,so you never know- my pick Ohio State, They play ISU Cyclones at home too.
My Picks
Tech over Utep
ISU over UNLV
TCU over Utah
Ohio State over Iowa
Upset Special
Texas A&M over Oklahoma
Baylor over A&M
Did You Kill the SEC Blog?
SEC leads the Nation in Attendance and hospitalityRusty Shackleford said:
posted on July 19, 2006 12:00 AM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Right now the best national championship game i can think of is Auburn vs. USC. I'm determined to see this game on TV. It will be hard though, and i think it will still be Auburn vs. Ohio State in the championship game if Auburn does go undefeated like i hope. I don't know though, last time we were expected to have a great season we crapped that season away.
And So Cal I have a "out-on-a-limb prediction" but it ain't like yours: Brady Quinn will get hurt midway through the season ending his heisman hopes and their chances of a national championship.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 19, 2006 8:41 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, does the guy have a history of being injury-prone? Or do you have any other kinda insight as to why that would happen to Quinn? (I dont think there a significant history of injury with Quinn).
The "Out-on-a-Limb" Predictions MUST have some logic behind it as obscure as it may be, theres gotta be atleast some reasoning supporting it, ya know. Its gotta be more than just "a gut feeling" sorta thing...
Rusty, put that one under your "Wishful Thinking" Predictions.And as for as the best Title Game I can think of, its... USC vs Texas. Redemption.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 19, 2006 9:07 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, if you say Im right about the Mt West & UNLV, why the nonsense about me being "so pro Pac-Ten & MT-Wst that it is ridiculous" and whats with this that you said about me: "You fail to realize that we are real sports fans and you sir are fucged up. Go Back to California you fuc%er"... what was that about? Texas hospitality?
How about you people Stay Out of California. (btw, did I say that I ever lived in California?). Tom, Im I to understand that it takes a Hypster to be a "real sports fan" - is that what youre saying?
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 19, 2006 9:26 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The 2006 Picks
________________The Worst Team in Division 1A:
Temple.Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #5:
This 2006 Temple team will be considered the Worst Team Ever (Coming off a 0-ll record, dealing with ineligible Starters, they scored less than 10 Pts & gave-up over 45 in 2005... they return only 4 Starters on Offense and 2 on Defense - I believe thats the fewest in the country! This year theyre dealing with a young first-time Head Coach, and only 76 scholarship players... will be considered worst ever).
So Cal: Challenge said:
posted on July 19, 2006 10:07 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Sp*rtsline.c*m has this fantasy CFB league thing, I was gonna join some random league, but then I thought hows about the people on FanBlogs form a league, to see whats What.
Moox, T-Mac, Franko G, The Mayor, Rusty, Tomcat, Tommy Trojan if he's still around, OU fan, AU03, or whomever...
Throw-out some time/date suggestions, ya gotta decide that before you create the league.
So Cal USMC: Challenge said:
posted on July 19, 2006 10:57 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Well I started a league already... Draft day/time is Monday the 24th, 6:15 PM Pacific Time (3:15 PM Eastern). Not a good time/date? If youre not there, you cant rank your picks before and leave it on Automatic Draft.
Look for the league is named:
"FanBlogs fans devoted to their team and league"Tomcat said:
posted on July 20, 2006 10:09 AM — 70.245.21.164 — link — abuse?
Hey Mr.Mayor I agree, hope the Ducks continue with their sucess. So-Cal- what happened,did you get a burr under your saddle? I will not apoligize to you sir,I cant help it. I like to sturr= up the pot a little bit, nothing personal.
Que es problema? sorry we live in different worlds. I have cow shit on my boots and I'm a Longhorns fan, emigane that.
I respect the PAC ten I saw what happened against Washington St., Stanford and UCLA in recent years.
You disrespected me and my origen.You compared Texans to NY? and to get on an SEC blog and put down the SEC? You are very knowlegable about CFB and I've enjoyed reading some of your stuff.
Enough is enough SEC leads the nation in Attendance !
If your not from Cal. Why do use half a dozen handles that start with So-Cal? Hookem Horns
Tomcat said:
posted on July 20, 2006 10:39 AM — 70.245.21.164 — link — abuse?
Hey OU fan I agree, even So-Cal admits the Hogs are Improved, Faettville Ark. Last time the Horns visited there they one.
So Cal thinks the Bears will win their conference HMM, what will happen with Nebraska, Oregon, and Notre Dame? Pete Carrol has a hell of a program. They will be a hell of a team for years.
I personally made alot of money last year on USC.
I was betting against them, and everbody beleived ol Keith Jackson and all the Hype.
Havent lost a football bet since the UT vs OU 04 game.
Made some good Money last time OU made their run, after they beat the hell out of UT, I bet on OU allthe way. They went undefeated and I was collecting everywhere.
My prediction
National Championship
Texas Vs Ohio State- Game one
Texas vs Oklahoma---Game Two
Texas vs Nebrasks--Game Three
Texas vs Nebraska--Game Four----BIG XII champ
Texas vs Whoever is left in the nation undefeated
Hookem-Horns SOS-We got it OCC-got that too
So Cal USCM said:
posted on July 20, 2006 8:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
In less than ONE DAY ?!? The league I created last night is already FILLED!
I thought it was gonna take some time to get people to join it. Gatorpilot did you Join? I dont know if any of these people are any of You... did anyone from fanblogs join? Are any of you (your team name) on this list?:
ut vols
Knights
Charlotte Yankees
TD TALKER
FLG
Santa Rosa Seminoles
southern elite conference
Gatorpilot, and everyone else who's interested, post Something! Time/date of the draft, Yes/No, F-off, something... maybe I can drop that leauge and start a new one, Fanblogs fans only or something. Let me know people.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 20, 2006 9:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, Im Not looking for an apology, goofball. Im questioning the consistancy in your logic, er, lack of consistancy. On both accounts; my assessment of the Mt West/being a 'Mt West Homer'... and... you taking a little jab at "SEC hospitality"/directing your own ~Texas hospitaltiy~ at me a few post later.
Anyway, forget all that.On the SEC, did I ever "put down" the SEC?
... well maybe, but its like someone saying "youre fat", to a snobby fat girl who doesnt think she's fat.
No wait, I take that back; the SEC's not a 'fat girl'. Its like pointing-out to a Cute-lookin chick whos full of herself, that she's got fat 'cankles' (her calves & ankles form one ugly mess). She looks good overall, but she's not as hot as she "thinks" she is.
How about that for a horrible analogy. But again, for the Nth time, Its not about putting down the SEC per`sa` its about calling "hype" when I see it; YES thats "a-t-t-e-n-d-a-n-c-e"... "strength" is another thing, "dominant" is yet another.Texanos and New Yorkians, thats how I see it - different accents but, Two peas in the same pompous Pod.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 20, 2006 9:46 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, USC finished 6-6 against the spread last season (in the particular source I look at), so you wouldnt have made any money if you beat against them Every game. I guess you isolated a few good angles on certain games, huh? USC wasnt a team to bet On or Against (dont know what kinda bookie youre dealing with).
If Anything, going 6-6 ATS is a sign that a team was 'appropriately' rated - the public's perception Vs the results came out EVEN, well that is "the betting public" anyway. And lemme tell you, they're not listening for some phanthom idea in the inflection in Keith Jackson's voice.
And how dare you try to besmirch the name of Keith Jackson. The Voice of College Football. I am shocked and appalled and shocked again. (joking)So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 20, 2006 11:04 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Whats everyone's Conference picks?
Im torn on my WAC pick.
Boise St - I gotta think that the Loss of HC Dan Hawkins is gonna hurt the on-field production/results. But Boi State returns a sh!t-load of Starters/personell from last year's team - some of the most in the country (9 and 9). And they get their TD-making-Machine, RB/FB Helmandollar, back from injury. And they are Boise State, and this is the WAC.Reno - Hall of Fame Coach, Chris Ault, has a good number of returning starters and has the team headed in the right direction, again (its his 3rd stint as Reno's HC). But the Points-Proximity trend goes agianst Reno; four close wins l/y suggests a weaker Record this yr.
F State - Pat Hill's still there but this team lost a sh!t-load of Talent. The entire Backfield is gone; very talented and was the strength of last yrs teams. Four of their best Defensive starters are gone too (for those NFL-nuts, just about every Starter {and even a backup WR} who left Fresno State this past season is Signed-up with a NFL team). Losing so much skill-postion talant, F State should expect a "down season"... but the team's got the "beef" coming back, their Lines are solid/veteran, Fresno State could surprise.
Hawaii - The Upset-er. Just one name, "Colt Brennan."
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 21, 2006 1:32 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, Someone killed the "SEC is Over-Hyped" blog, I think thats why theyre not going through... or not. Anyway, I created the league but its already full! but I think I could get out of it... start a new one, a sorta FanBlogs league... Im assuming that so far it looks like this...
- GatorPilot
- T-Mac
- So Cal
... Sportsli#e.c@m leagues have 8 slots per league. Anyone else?So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 21, 2006 3:56 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, did you get my response btw?:
Moox dont think that Im saying that LSU didnt deserve to be this or that... what I said about LSU 2003 was in response to TruWar, who wants to start that silly 'USC wasnt a tru Champs' talk. IIIFFF someone's gonna get into that sorta crap of "well LSU woulda, shoulda, could" done this or that, bla, blah, they have to be set staright. Disputed Titles happen... the AP Poll has been Naming a Champion for over 70 YEARS Carlito, Seventy Years (flaws n'all)... 2003 was no different. To be clear, there's no discrediting LSU's Title from me. But if, If anyone is gonna try to make "shoulda/woulda" claims about 2003, ya gotta understand it cuts both ways.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 22, 2006 3:29 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The 2006 Picks
_________________Out-on-a-Limb Preditions #7:
The Coaching "hot seat" will be a quite a few degrees hotter in the ACC Atlantic division... Ralph Frig, Chuck Amato, Tommy Bowden - the Bloom is off the Rose (maybe even for the other Bowden too).bringbradyback go blue said:
posted on July 22, 2006 4:55 PM — 216.46.213.28 — link — abuse?
09/02/06 Arkansas Fayetteville, Ark. L
09/16/06 Nebraska L.A. Coliseum L
09/23/06 Arizona Tucson, Ariz. W
09/30/06 Washington State Pullman, Wash. W
10/07/06 Washington L.A. Coliseum W
10/14/06 Arizona State L.A. Coliseum W
10/28/06 Oregon State Corvallis, Ore. W
11/04/06 Stanford Palo Alto, Calif. W
11/11/06 Oregon L.A. Coliseum W
11/18/06 California L.A. Coliseum W
11/25/06 Notre Dame L.A. Coliseum L
12/02/06 UCLA Pasadena, Calif. WUSC will lose all their non conf games.
Mooka said:
posted on July 24, 2006 1:29 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
yea, i'll set my alarm for 6:15. Yea, I got the blog about disputed titles happen. I think the only true disputible championships are the ones that have undefeated teams that don't get a shot. When you have three or four teams that all have the same strength, record, etc...I don't know. Too controversal. Flip a coin. Whatever.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 24, 2006 4:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, no offense but thats just a "gut feeling" Sort of pick... or maybe a "wishful thinking" pick if you dont like Notre Dame or something. But its FOUNDLESS, it cant be an "Out-on-a-Limb" Pick... ya gotta have something behind it to back it up. As small a "limb" as it may be, there's gotta be a "limb" there, know what I mean?
Brady Quinn is gettin injured half way thru the season -- based on what? Is ND facing a bone-crushing team at mid-season? Purdue, Stanford, UCLA? I personlly hope your, eh hem, "pick" is correct, without Quinn: NAVY over Notre Dame after 42 straight seasons! (but thats only wishful thinking on my part)So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 24, 2006 4:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Shee... Darren McFadden, Peyton Hillis, Felix Jones - thats probably the deepest top-level RB Crew in the country, and yeah I know about Georgia, Cal, Ohio St, Texas (Ramonce Taylor is not at Texas anymore, right?), and Oklahoma, Louisville arent necessarily "deep".
T-Mac you wanna give a score for that game? Actually, how the game gonna go? break it down for us T.
So Cal: Jarrett !?! said:
posted on July 25, 2006 2:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rust, USC's not making it to the National Title game. Auburn?... I dont know, they return a decent amount of talent, but I'll taking few teams ahead of em.
(Here's my "gut feeling/wishful thinking" Injury Pick... First game of the season, RB Darren McFadden suffers a season-ending injury inflicted by bone-crushing LB Rey Maualuga).Mooka said:
posted on July 25, 2006 11:57 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal,
Post 386...yea, about as long as I could remember the Philly fans love their Philly cheese steaks and Eagle football. There are so many colleges in that city and I don't think any of them really care about football. The same I think is true for the Northeast coast as a whole. I can't really think of any spectacular college football teams from Northeast coast except for maybe Penn St, and with the exception of last year they have been way under spectacular. I think Lacrosse may be even bigger then football in that region. Don't ask me why.
I think you are right about the Raider fans too come to think of it. I've lived in Cali too and it seems the Raider fans bark is louder than the bite. I think Californians just like whoever from the state is on top. Next year everyone might be a Charger fan.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 26, 2006 1:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Yeah your right Moox, except for Penn State there is no College Football on the East Coast, er Northeast, but thats sort of a tangent issue you bring up.
I was talking about "Fan Support" more specifically. Philadelphia Fans as a whole sorta "get credit" for being great fans... maybe as NFL fans, but so what, that's ONE Sport (and maybe Ice Hockey too, thats One and a Half sports total). Look at Miami sports fans - what the perception that we have of them? Bandwagon, Fair-Weather, Front-Runners, etc... but dont the Miami Dolphins have great attendance each year? Dolphins have a solid fan base. Now, the Miami Hurricanes get out-drawn by UTEP! so that sport is a different story, Marlins too, etc. Point is Philly fan gets too much credit.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 26, 2006 2:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
And Moox, you bring up another example. "Raider Fan" generally gets too much credit, so to speak... looking at it from the point of view of attendance; they dont draw extremely well. Though, you do have to take into consideration that The Bay area has two NFL teams to support, but still the perception of the Raider Fan is a bit overblown (I guess dressing up in get-ups gets you extra points in "rabid-ness").
BUT the same way you cant lump together all Philadelphia Fans (seperate NFL Eagles fans from MLB Phillies fans, etc), you cant lump together California Fans either.
Where are the Dodgers right now? What are they 1-14 since the All-Star break? Below .500?
Dodger Fan draws 45,000 per game! only the NY Yankees have better attendance. The Dodgers havent won a playoff series in almost 20 years!
Matter o fact over the Past 10 Years, Los Angeles Baseball teams, Dodgers & Angles combined, have out-drawn New York baseball fans, Mets & Yankees combined!
New York baseball teams have had 8 World Series apperences
Los Angeles baseball teams have had 1 World Series apperance.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 26, 2006 2:34 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Also, Mooks, the Clippers have a pretty decent fandom. And if you consider all of the bad season, all of the door-mat-Jokes over the years, living in the Shadow of the Premiere team in the NBA, We Clipper fans are argueably "good fans". Lemme tell you, there hasnt been too much "fair weather" around here, til this past season. The Clipper Nation compares well with Boston Celtics, in attendence (since the lockout season)
And just to point-out (not to give em too much credit) Laker fans; two seasons without Shaq, not being a Legit contender, Laker fans are still in the Top 10 in Home Attendance (no drop-off... yet).Mooka said:
posted on July 28, 2006 12:56 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
T, I think I'm jumping on Socal's Fugk the NFL bandwagon. I just read an article about the Saints having trouble getting Bush on the Field for practice if he doesn't get 54mil. Let's not even talk about his endorsments that he's made already. This has all been going on too long in the NFL. There are some that play be/c they love it, and they can still get rich. Then, there are those that are just greedy. All I see is a bunch of rich millionaires bitchin about their pay in the NFL. Nevermind all that!!!!! I'm sick of it!!!!! Good luck to Reggie Bush, Terrell Owens, and all you other rich whinners. I hope you get all that you want. Even if that means making others get a pay cut. Hey, at least you got yours, right? Team effort, right? I'm sorry, but I liked watchin those players more when they were playing for heart, and for the love. I'll stick to CFB. T-Mac be glad you never got your mind warped with greed. Their must be alot of pressure not ever feeling content with what you got. Even though you got it all.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 28, 2006 3:32 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, for me thats not even it... people trying to get paid what they think they're worth, thats just business, thats Pro sports, thats the corporate world in general. That sorta stuff happens in the NBA to some degree, but its still one of my favorite sports. Boxing, business fugks that sport up as much as any, but I still enjoy the sport, Etc... Im Not gonna not-like a sport just for that.
I say F the NFL, mainly cause College Football is so much more enjoyable to follow. And I know its sortava a symbiotic relationship, but the NFL too often takes-away from college football, ei, Bush, Young, Tatupu last year... so that only makes it worse (I like the NBA and College Basketball about the same).
T-Mac said:
posted on July 28, 2006 4:12 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mooka,Don't let a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch!Look at players like Warrick Dunn for instance and what he does for charity.Reggie Bush has already done charity work as well,but you never hear about those things only the negative crap like T.O.,Randy Moss,Ricky Williams etc.Don't jump on any bandwagon.Think for yourself.Be a leader,not a follower.I'm out.HOLLA
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 28, 2006 5:27 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
So What are everyone's Picks for 2006 ?!
Title Game - the two teams and the winner
Heisman - who you think will "earn it" when its all said and done... and Not necassarily who you think the poll voters will "vote for"
This year's "Tennessee" - which preseason Contender is gonna free-fall off the radar? if any.
This year's "Penn St, UCLA, Bama" - making a huge jump Up from mediocrity the previous season.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 30, 2006 4:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
RUSTY! Does that count for Half? Darren McFadden is Already Injuried, probably wont get a chance to get really injured by Rey Maualuga, Docs say he may miss the first game of the season. Do I atleast get have credit for that wishfulthining pick?
___________________________
So Cal says: posted on July 25, 2006...
... (Here's my "gut feeling/wishful thinking" Injury Pick... First game of the season, RB Darren McFadden suffers a season-ending injury inflicted by bone-crushing LB Rey Maualuga).
___________________________
Mooka said:
posted on July 31, 2006 11:17 AM — 138.163.0.36 — link — abuse?
That's just why I like cfb better. When you are watching, it just feels more like you are watching a sport and not a business. Sure there is a business behind the scenes, but the bottom line is if your ass ain't on the field by Monday for practice you won't play, and you will be sorry. The tables are turned in NFL. Players have too much leverage. CFB is more enjoyable to watch be/c it is real.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 31, 2006 4:58 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Hunter, USC 24 - Arkie 17
The little I saw of Peyton Hillis(multi-use) and Felix Jones, I liked. I felt that Ark had one of the Deepest RB corps in the country before the MacFadden news, so I dont expect a significant drop-off. From Ark's percpective, I'd be worried about that new Offensive Coordinator messing with a pretty good Offense (Heavy-Running game), following QB Mustain to Arkansas... Im just a bit weiry. Mustain, Parade Player of the Year, but didnt show it in the H.S. All-American game. I dont know the stats but it seemed like every other QB did better. Tim Tebow looked solid, strong, Meyer should shyt-can Chris Leak (joking).So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 31, 2006 5:12 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, it'll probably turn out to be a blessing in disguise for Arkie, in the long run. The Back-ups get a bit more seasoning.
But I feel I should get half-credit, I mean come on, I make a gut feeling/wishful thinking Prediction about an Injury, and only FIVE DAYS later The Guy gets Injured!...
No it wasnt Season-ending, and No it didnt happen in the game, by Rey Maualuga... okay, atleast give me quarter-credit.All I wanna know is if I can claim to be 1-for-1 in my predictions.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 31, 2006 6:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Updated: July 31, 2006, 12:33 PM ET
Ohio State president who fired Woody Hayes diesAssociated PressCOLUMBUS, Ohio -- Former Ohio State president Harold Enarson, who fired Woody Hayes after the football coach slugged an opposing player in a 1978 bowl game, has died. He was 87.
---------Woody's gonna "slug" this guy when he runs into him up there, or down there, where every they are now.
hunter said:
posted on July 31, 2006 10:50 PM — 4.226.135.67 — link — abuse?
i dont think houston will start mustain against usc. dick will get the start probably. i think marcus monk will be the most improved player this year. mcfadden still has a chance though of coming back before the usc game. it depends on how his toe heals. watch out for damian williams, the other kid from springdale. he has kinda been under the radar because of mustain. i think he and mustain could just be the next montana and rice haha. but seriously i still think we have a chance against usc. it gives felix jones a chance to shine. it depends on the hog mollys up front. and our defense. hopefully sam olajubutu can have a breakout senior year.
T-Mac said:
posted on August 1, 2006 2:21 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mooka,I agree with you being that CFB is alot more enjoyable to watch.Let's not get contract negotiations confused with season play in the NFL.It's just part of it.Like anywhere else people would work.If you have a contract than you negotiate for what is best for your wallet.That's life.I like the way the NFL is headed.The Eagles and Andy Reid didn't put up with any of T.O's crap last season.They took away the one thing T.O. had.FOOTBALL.You know it killed him not to play last year and it should have.He's a jerk.A very talented jerk,but still a jerk.The only time the players have leverage is during the BUSINESS side of things.That's It.If you go to a job interview and they offer you $40 an hour would you see if they could squeeze $45 an hour??That's just life in general.It's not that the NFL players are all that way.I have friends in (THE GAME).They just wan't to make sure that their families are taken care of in case something bad happens.Every time you step on the field whether it's College or NFL you are taking a potential life-ending risk.How many NFL players do you know that have medical/health insurance or life insurance???The media doesn't wan't the public to see what the NFL and it's players do for various charities either.The media alway's focuses on all the negative things.Keep that in mind Mooka next time you watch an NFL game.Don't let the business side of it ruin the game for you.It's not fair to the players who sacrifice bro.Think about it.
T-Mac said:
posted on August 1, 2006 3:17 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mooka,I'll break it down for you like this since 54,000,000 has been the magic number this year.
54,000,000 NFL PLAYERS SALARY
29,700,000 55% TAX BRACKET
24,300,000 AFTER TAXES TAKEN OUT
3,645,000 15% TO YOUR AGENT-COULD BE MORE
4,131,000 20% LAWYER FEES
2,974,320 18% CHARITY
948,477 7% MISCELLANEOUS FEES
12,601,202 TAKE HOME PAY-OVER LIFE OF CONTRACTMooka,this is a lot of money over 4,5,6,or 7 years,but it is nowhere near 54,000,000 that you see everyday in print and hear on TV.Don't forget about setting your family up in the lap of luxury.Also,all the people who will have their hand out whether it be sincere or insincere.You'd be lucky to have 9,000,000 left over,but also keep in mind that you don't get it all at one time either.It is rationed out.NOW ON TO YOUR LIFE IF YOU CAN HAVE ONE.You see Mooka,things aren't alway's what they appear.Don't get me wrong the life is great,but when you are in bed cause you can't hardly move,poppin pain pills,the 60-inch plasma gets kind of boring when you wanna play basketball G.I hope I dont regret this tomorrow.Alright Mooka I guess that's enough for 1 night.PEACE I'm out.Your BRO!!HOLLA T-Mac
El Jefe said:
posted on August 1, 2006 9:33 AM — 68.229.57.85 — link — abuse?
I'm a huge fan of the sport! Just came in to look at what you guys are saying about USC. I don't think anybody in their right mind can say anything negative about the talent of this great football team. Their is a problem "SORRY TO SAY". The BCS is crap. The best team in the country? Gentlemen Please! Mark my words... USC will have a good season again. Only because of the "MEDIOCRITY" of the PAC 10. At best a 10-2 record. A loss to Notre Dame and Nebraska are eminent. Oh! and yes, I said Nebraska. Your underestimating a team that is simply better then USC this year.
Mooka said:
posted on August 1, 2006 12:34 PM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
T-Mac,
Point taken...I don't know how far out of context those tax dollars went, but I got the gest. You were right about T.O. too. It was nice to see him suffer not being able to play. I don't really blame him though, I blame his agent. I hope the Eagles come back hard this year and don't get me wrong, I want to see the Saints go to the Super Bowl while they are still in NO and I won't hate. It just makes me sick wacthing them bitch over millions and millions of dollars. I would kill for just 1 million.
T-Mac said:
posted on August 1, 2006 1:20 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
hunter,Of course you have a chance against USC.Don't look for Mustain to start any this year unless the other 2 self-destruct.He'll see some action,but starting him would be throwing him to the wolves.You know how fast the SEC defenses are.It would be suicide.Post me back with your week 1 scores bro.HOLLA
OU Fan said:
posted on August 1, 2006 3:02 PM — 72.161.219.136 — link — abuse?
USC was only back to back Natl Champions because OU lost to LSU. If OU won, there would be none of this USC crap that I always hear about. No offense to USC fans, but I got pretty tired of always hearing about Bush and Leinart everyday prior to the title game. Bush is a shady character and Leinart too arrogant for his own good, and arrogance cost USC a Natl Championship. USC won't dominate this year because there are too many teams this season with as much talent as USC.
hunter said:
posted on August 1, 2006 5:13 PM — 4.226.135.253 — link — abuse?
sorry t-mac i dont feel like doin scores. the voice of the razorbacks paul eells died in a car wreck last night. im really sad. i got to job shadow him earlier this year and he was one of the nicest people i have ever met. and now he's gone.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 2, 2006 6:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, I'll admit that was in poor taste, but worse is that it wasnt that funny... I apologize. And I wont make a joke about Woody slugging Fidel Castro (soon to be RIPing)... wait! this just in: Castro is planning a revolution to over-throw Satan.
Why is it that the most often times you hear someone talk about being "Classy" is in College Football debates (usually reguarding Coaches, though)... Well maybe second most often, next to chicks talking trash about other chicks Not being Classy (usually neither one is all that Classy).
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 2, 2006 6:33 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
OU Fan WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!
So if Oklahoma beat LSU, then what? The No.3 team(OK) jumps-over the No.1 team(USC) in the Final AP Poll?
LSU was the No.2 team, and Won, and didnt supplant USC, so what are you talking about?So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 2, 2006 6:57 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka says: "It was nice to see [Terrell Owens] suffer... I would kill for just 1 million."
T-Mac arent you gonna reprimand Mooks for his/her insensitivity towards people who have been "killed"?T-Mac says: "You know how fast the SEC defenses are.It would be suicide."
T-Mac, making-light-of a tragic issue such as "suicide", Tsk, Tsk.RIP Castro... RIP
I'm out.Stay Classy San Diego!!HOLLASo Cal USMC said:
posted on August 2, 2006 7:11 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
El Halfy, OU Fan, and Moox, USC is not gonna dominate this season. Actually, "10-2" is about what I expect, too. But I dont know about Nebraska being "simply better" than USC, or that there are so many other teams with USC-caliber "talent".
It comes down to experience, this season.
Losing a Heisman QB, a Heisman RB, and another RB that happens to have the most TDs at "Tailback U", it tough to replace in one season.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 2, 2006 7:27 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, I'll take that, I'll leave Auburn alone... that means I'm 1-for-1 in my picks... which means T-Mac is already in the hole, 0-for-1...
posted on July 23 - T-Mac says: Week 1 Arkansas- The Upset-er.Just one name,"Darren McFadden."
T, you jinxed the guy.
OU fan probably jinxed Bomar.T-Mac said:
posted on August 2, 2006 10:33 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
El Jefe,let's not put the cart before the horse.USC will still be very good this season.Losses to Notre Dame and Nebraska are not eminent.You can't truly say that.Games are not played in Pre-season magazines.Nebraska should be better this season.They should have a top-10 defense with that front seven.As far as a prediction on their record,not sure yet.This season is looking up for the Huskers though.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on August 3, 2006 12:59 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Here are my PAC picks week 1.
I had the USC/ARK score long before D-Fad got hurt.
USC-35 ARKANSAS-21
OREGON-41 STANFORD-20
CALIFORNIA-27 TENNESSEE-28
UCLA-35 UTAH-31
ASU-63 NORTHERN ARIZONA-10
OREGON STATE-31 EASTERN WASHINGTON-6
WASHINGTON STATE-10 AUBURN-48
WASHINGTON-24 SAN JOSE STATE-17
STANFORD-20 OREGON-41
ARIZONA-24 BRIGHAM YOUNG-27
Those are my PAC-10 picks/scores.Peace.I'm out.HOLLASo Cal USMC said:
posted on August 3, 2006 4:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Detailed picks T-Mac.
I dont think USC-Ark or Cal-Tenny are gonna be that high-scoring, though.
Every one of those Offenses are not really "caught-up" with their Defenses (esp the case, that early in the season).
I say Utah over FUCLA and Arizona over BYU.The Mayor said:
posted on August 3, 2006 5:44 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
I am all in T-Mac, but I must say I suck at this...never won a dime betting sports:
USC-45 ARKANSAS-17
OREGON-38 STANFORD-17
CALIFORNIA-35 TENNESSEE-21
UCLA-35 UTAH-10
ASU-42 NORTHERN ARIZONA-10
OREGON STATE-24 EASTERN WASHINGTON-10
WASHINGTON STATE- 44 AUBURN-38
WASHINGTON-0 SAN JOSE STATE-17
ARIZONA-31 BRIGHAM YOUNG-14Mooka said:
posted on August 4, 2006 5:35 AM — 138.163.0.36 — link — abuse?
USC-0 ARKANSAS-100
OREGON-28 STANFORD-14
CALIFORNIA-28 TENNESSEE-31
UCLA-35 UTAH-10
ASU-42 NORTHERN ARIZONA-3
OREGON STATE-31 EASTERN WASHINGTON-0
WASHINGTON STATE-7 AUBURN-45
WASHINGTON-24 SAN JOSE STATE-17
ARIZONA-28 BRIGHAM YOUNG-24I don't know sh__ about some of these teams such as Eastern Washington and Nothern Arizona, but these scores seemed pretty accurate to me. Especially the USC v Ark. & yes I am smoking some dope.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 4, 2006 3:36 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac whats this about a 'truce'... theres never been a war. Its an exchange of thoughts, information, opinions, etc. Thats why I ask, where was the contridiction? It seemed like YOU were trolling; trying to instigate some stuff there.
Can you say that I HAVENT been consistant... in that particular issue? - Bama's only got 10 Titles... Diputed Titles are a part of CFB... you cant discredit USC's 2003 Title (or LSU's).
Give a honest explination if you believe so - what "trap", why/how should I have been humiliated, etc.T-Mac said:
posted on August 4, 2006 7:02 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Do you guys honestly think Arkansas will beat USC?Just curious.I think USC will come out blazin in that first game and try to make a statement.I'm sure the team is sick to death by now of hearing about losing Leinart,Bush,and White just to name a few.They will be out to prove a point.I think a lot of people are underestimating USC this year.USC wont score 70 again,but Arkansas better be ready to bang or they'll get beat again!
T-Mac said:
posted on August 4, 2006 10:21 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
The more I study the CAL/TENN teams and intangibles this game is shaping up to be great.If Coach Cut has settled Erik Ainge down and made him comfortable in his offense than Tenn should win.If we see the Erik Ainge of last year than this game won't be close.If he gets rattled and throws picks instead of throwing it away it will be a long day for Tenn and Cal could win by a couple TD's.Marshawn Lynch might just be the difference in this one!
T-Mac said:
posted on August 5, 2006 12:37 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mooka,Ark-100 USC-0.Come on bro.What is your score of this game for real.It'll take Arkansas 4 games to score 100 points.I like all your other picks.If you would like to stick with that score than you are welcome to.You are entitled to pick your scores as you see fit.Mooka,if you are smoking a bag of dank,that's your business not mine.If you really want to feel good than switch to steroids!Me and So Cal did and our 5-day a week weightlifting sessions have never been better!LOL.Seriously,USC at Arkansas.What is your score Mooka??
Tomcat said:
posted on August 5, 2006 3:56 PM — 69.152.139.90 — link — abuse?
So-Cal in reference to post #414 No bookies, no point spread, I collected from private individuals that beleived in all the hype about SC's three peat, the best there ever was ETc.Etc.
I took the feild, and I was really close a couple of times.UT pulled it out in the final seconds. So I was betting against them the entire season. With a 34 game winning streak and two heisman winners they had alot of takers.
Hey Mayor you might not want to bet the house. The Hogs are at home, and are a much improved team. USC is giving 8.5 go with a consevative amount on the Hogs.
What about the Tenn vs Cal?
Ohio State vs Texas ?
Whats the line on the Ole Miss at Mizzu ?So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 5, 2006 6:22 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, so youre sorta talking about a Futures bet... you took the field against USC... well thats different. Cause like I said, USC was 6-6 against the spread before the Texas loss.
Tomcat, just to let you know if you woulda been betting ON USC since Pete Carroll the past 5 seasons, you woulda cleaned up - not that I did, but Pete Carroll has the 4th Best A.T.S. Record among all active Coaches! Thats damn-good for being at a Major program, and thats not just Homer-ism talking, thats Research talking.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 5, 2006 6:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat and T-mac and anyone else, ESPN and Sports Illustrated claim 9 and 10 for Bama (or something like that).
And )))THAT((( is whats really at debate with this old-issue; the "degree" of the validity of certain Selection Orgs. It seems to me that Bama-ers (and SEC-er in general) arent really consistant with their logic (with this particular issue). If Bama "won" a Title in 1966, then Arizona St won a Title in 1975, BUT neither one is really "recognized" because the degree of validity of the Selection Orgs that selected them at the time.
Bama's Titles of 1973 and 1964 are ACCOUNTED for, they are "recognized". Do you now see that I AM BEING CONSISTANT?
- Disputed Titles happen
- Bama has 10 Titles (two Others are not Valid/widely recognized)
- USC's and LSU's 2003 Titles are Valid (or "true" in the words of Truwar and/or T-Mac)I bring up Bama's 1973 and 1964 Titles as example of some of the more 'questionable' Titles that ARE Recognized, ONLY in reponse to the claims that Arkansas and Old Miss have "won" National Titles. Because making such claims when NIETHER the AP or COACHES ever selected those teams, OPENS UP a pandora's box of Questioning/Challenging the validity of the AP and Coaches polls... inturn, Bama' 1973 and 1964 Titles are opened up to scruitiny. Its that selective-ness (of accepting the arguements for Arkanas & Miss) that evokes the questioning of those Bama Titles.
Nut-shelling it all, ya gotta decide which Selection Orgs to use, and ya cant have it both ways.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 5, 2006 7:05 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, were you here for the USA Basketball game? I was there with my Clipper Nation T-shirt.
Go to the Hilton sports book, they usually have the most lines, on anything and everything.
Btw, I think Cal Berkeley is a 2-pt dog on the Road vs Tenny.So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 5, 2006 7:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
I sorta started giving my Picks back in Post 362, the Mt West takes a collective Step-Up... they might finish Rated higher than the Big East this season.
The 2006 Picks
___________________
Heisman: Brady Quinn. Ive been having more resevations about Troy Smith; the RB crew is elite, Ohio St might be going Run-Heavy, and Im not buying into Ted Ginn as a Stud-WR as much as others seem to. And Adiran Peterson could move up or down on the Hesiman list without Bomar.. still thinking.
___________________
PAC Champs - Cal Berkeley
XII Champs - Nebraska (over Texas)
BTEN Champs - Ohio St
SEC Champs - Tenny (over Auburn)
ACC Champs - FSU (over VTech)
BEast Champs - Louisville
WAC Champs - Boise State
MtWest Champs - Utah
CUSA Champs - UTEP (over UAB)
MAC Champs - Toledo (over Akron)
SBelt Champs - No Texas
___________________
Rose Bowl - Cal over Iowa
Fiesta Bowl - USC over Texas
Sugar Bowl - Tenny over Louisville
Orange Bowl - Nebraska over Florida St
Title Game - Notre Dame over Ohio St
___________________
Most Improved Teams list:
Arizona, NAVY, Tenny, Arkansas, UNLV, aTm, Hawaii, Kent St
___________________
Notable Drop-off teams list:
Bama, TCU, FUCLA, Penn St, TTech, Wisconsin, Northwestern, La Tech, Iowa St, Miami OH
___________________
Teams on the Up-Set War Path (not necessarily most improved):
San Deigo St, Reno, Rutgers, Oregon St, Michigan St, Georgia Tech
___________________
Toughest SOS: between Washington & Florida
___________________
Worst Team: Temple
___________________
Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #1:
No-name Yvenson Bernard, Oregon State RB, will be an All-American.
Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #2:
Navy's HC Paul Johnson is named Coach of the Year.
Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #3:
Mark Richt will be moving on to Florida State when Bowden steps down (whenever that is)
Out-on-a-Limb Prediction #4:
Arizona State's Defense DOUBLES its Total Sacks; from 22 to atleast 44 this season (infusion of Transfers/Jucos, DC in his 2nd season, and players returning from injuries).So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 5, 2006 7:57 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
If Bama has 12 Titles then Arizona St can claim a Title for 1975 and maybe even 1970... If Bama has 12, what's to stop USC from claiming a Title for 2002 -- when 3 different Selections Orgs, not named AP or Coaches, named USC(11-2) the Champs over Ohio St(14-0). And a shyt-load of other "Titles" can be claimed by a number of other teams if Bama can claim 12 when in reality/reason they only have 10.
T-Mac said:
posted on August 5, 2006 8:31 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,you honestly think that Tennessee is going to win the SEC this year?Come on,are you serious?This is vertually the same team that was 5-6 last year.I know they got Coach Cut back as offensive coor,but he is not a miracle worker.Erik Ainge needs to step it up this year and be able to play under pressure.He hasn't demonstrated that yet.He might this year.I could be wrong.What is so different this year that you think Tenn will win the SEC Champ Game??Tenn goes 8-4 possibly 9-3 and gets a decent bowl,but no Sugar this year.Maybe next year.I like your picks though!
T-Mac said:
posted on August 5, 2006 9:58 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,throw out some picks for week 1.PAC,SEC,BIG XII,or any other conf you want.Winners and scores etc.If you just wanna do PAC and SEC that's all good because I haven't done my BIG XII picks yet either.To me it makes it fun.If you don't want to than that's cool.Peace
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on August 6, 2006 12:47 AM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Heisman: Troy Smith, he will have a year similar to vince's but he won't win a national championship like vince did.
PAC Champs - USC
XII Champs - Oklahoma
BTEN Champs - Ohio St
SEC Champs - Auburn
ACC Champs - Florida State
BEast Champs - West Virginia
WAC Champs - Boise State
MtWest Champs - Utah
CUSA Champs - UAB
MAC Champs - Toledo
SBelt Champs - North Texas
National Champs - AuburnI didn't pick Auburn just because they're my team, I seriously think this is the year they finally get an outright national championship. I feel alot better about this year than I did about 2004 when we started out 6th and started out unbelievably rusty.
So Cal, I agree with you on most of it except for Bama being a drop off team, even shula said the other day that he thinks that Bama will win because he thinks they have a unbelievable defense, and they can throw the ball and run the ball better than last year.
I've been at the beach for a week, so I was without a computer.
SLICK said:
posted on August 6, 2006 4:11 AM — 130.184.114.42 — link — abuse?
YEP-That's just like a USC fan...Open your mouth,and stupid shit comes out!You guys are going back to the scrap pile with five losses hung on you-You know like in the John Robinson days!Here are five truths to swallow(because I know you love to swallow).
you vs.Arkansas......LOSS
you vs.CAL...........LOSS
you vs.Notre Dame....LOSS
you vs.Nebraska......LOSS
you vs.UCLA..........LOSSDon't feel bad trojan fan...Where your teams lacks on the stat sheet-They make up for it on the rap sheet!The SEC don't have that problem-They'll do well at both!!!!!
USC(University of Sucking Cock)GO BRUINS BE-OTCH!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 6, 2006 5:33 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Slick, "the SEC dont have that problem", Really?!!! Stupid shyt comes out of Who's mouth??? From a FUCLA fan or SEC-hypter, thats hilarious. By the way, what stupid shyt were you refering to specifically?
"John Robinson days", meaning a National Title, Rose Bowls, being in Title contention... I guess you probably meant "Paul Hackett days".
Tomcat said:
posted on August 6, 2006 6:23 PM — 69.152.139.90 — link — abuse?
Hey T-Mac Heres Mine
Looking at week #1 in Big XII only a few jump out at ya.
La Tech at Nebraska Neb
I like the Bulldogs and they did good last year and even beat Fresno State, However the Huskers at home after their big bowl win, sorry Dawgs
UAB at OU OU
Sorry Blazers but the OU defense will be toughSMU at TTech TTech
SMU is much improved and could pull an upset, however a new secondary will be hard to stop Mike Leach's all out air attack in LubbockNorth Texas at UT UT
Everyone on this blog likes the Mean Green, they have their front four o-line returning and have a good running game.They will be better this year, but not in Austin. The Horns have only lost one game at home in six years.Watch Jamal Charles break 200 ydsToledo Rockets vs Iowa State
This looks like a great matchup and ought to be a good game. Toledo has most of its team returning.This one could go either way my pick Iowa State -Brett Meyer throwing to Blythe will probably be the difference.TCU at Baylor
This is another great matchup between two old SWC rivals. My pick Baylor Bears
The other games in the Big XII
Colorado over Montana State Hawkins first game as HC something to proveK-State vs Illinois State K-State same as above new coach
Ron Prince
The other games I'll go with the XII teams, Im really not familiar with the opponents
The three best games should be
SMU vs TTech
Toledo vs Iowa State
TCU at Baylor Hookem-Horns Sicem-Bears
T-Mac said:
posted on August 6, 2006 11:23 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Tomcat,great picks bro!You are right about the North Texas @ Texas game.It shouldn't even be close.I wouldn't doubt Jamaal Charles breaking 200 yds either.Last year he had 878 yds on only 119 carries which is a 7.4yd avg/carry.That averages out to only 9 carries/game.Just think what Charles will do after getting the rock 20-25 times/game.Great average.He probably would have had more carries too,but there was a QB named Vince Young who also liked to tuck and run!!!You might have heard of him.LOL.The longhorns are loaded at tailback.It is Charles time to shine.He looks like he will be the next great UT tailback!Look for the Horns to run,run,and run this year as they are breaking in a new QB!Alabama is actually in the same boat this year too.Bama is loaded at tailback too,but the Texas backs have more game action.Hookem-Horns Roll Tide!!!
T-Mac said:
posted on August 7, 2006 3:08 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,it seems SLICK is bad-mouthing USC and the SEC both.I won't repeat what was said about USC,but he/she says the SEC will do well on the stat sheet and rap sheet.I won't get into that stuff or stoop to that level,but I think it's safe to say he or she isn't an SEC fan either.So Cal,at the end of that post it says Go Bruins.That says a lot,but at the same time he or she is bad-mouthing the SEC too.I know we have had a difference of opinion on a few things,but this brings it to a whole other level.Juvenile level.If you look at the time of the first post it is at 4:11AM.The next post by SLICK says(Excuse the last Post,I was out to lunch).That post is at 5:00PM.I don't know many people who eat lunch at 4:11 in the morning.Do you?Whether it's the same person who knows?Peace
Memcalhorn said:
posted on August 7, 2006 4:14 AM — 24.165.181.187 — link — abuse?
That first game, hmmm...Yeah...hope y'all are ready because Houston Nutt would like nothing more than to give you a little surprise upset to take back to SoCal. They are overdue for a big game...I would not underestimate the Razorbacks...SUUUUWEEEE!!!!
And who is your Daddy(?)...Texas, that is right...first UNDISPUTED BCS champ in three years...your guys could not have beat LSU or Auburn...bottom line.
Hope you all enjoy the season and none of your games get pre-empted like the ones in this part of the country do during the day on Sat. (your games usually are shown it their entirety because of late PCT).
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 7, 2006 4:26 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Uh-oh, here we go... the Arky fans are finally waking up, but only to flap their lips.
He says "who's your daddy" and "bottom line"... ya might aswell thrown-in a "nuff said," its a classic go-to line for those know-nothing, blow-hard, watered-down, so-called 'Fans'.This is a good example of a broken clock being right twice a day. I agree Arkansas shouldnt be over-looked, and they have shown the propensity to stand toe-to-toe with better teams recently (Texas in '03 & '04, Geo & LSU in '05, etc)
Its gonna be a good game, even without MacFadden Ark's got a solid running game. Mustain and the new Off Coord are the 'unknown'.T-Mac said:
posted on August 7, 2006 4:51 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Memcalhorn,it seems you are overlooking a few things here.First,Arkansas has a brand new Off corr.Second,their QB's are very young.Three,McFadden will not play in all likelihood.Granted,Jones and Hillis are good runners,but they are not Darren McFadden.Anytime you bring in a new Off Coor you are bound to have some kinks to work out.Nobody is underestimating the Razorbacks.USC should still be a very good team this year.Let's not put the cart before the horse.That's all.
USC-35 ARKANSAS-21So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 7, 2006 4:55 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat and T-Mac, I usually focus on handicapping games that I have a good read on.
To give Scores on games like Oregon St vs Eastern Washington?... I dont fugken know.
The only 'toss-up' game I see week 1 in the XII is Toledo @ Iowa St, the rest are a foregone conclusion (then TCU @ Baylor, maybe)Those 3 are a bit interesting...
ECarl @ NAVY - Two successful Div-1AA coaches meeting in D1A... Paul Johnson/NAVY has the better team.
Houston @ Rice - Houston/Kevin Kolb are about to peek (best team in a while), and Rice is re-tooling (dropping the Option offense)
As for Old Miss vs Memphis - DeAngelo Williams is gone, its Ed Orgeron's 2nd season as HC at Miss (improvement is expected), its AT Miss... Id say Memphis is more likely to score on Defense & Special Teams than on Offense.So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 7, 2006 5:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Nevermind FSU @ Miami or Cal @ Tenny...
Temple @ Buffalo - The Battle for Worst. Temple's best shot at a Win, wont get it.
Northwestern @ Miami OH - its gonna be a somber game; Randy Walker. Both teams are taking a step down this year.
Hawai'i @ Alabama - a good contrast of styles. Bama is a heavy favorite, but it could be interesting.
Game like BYU @ Arizona, Lafayette @ LSU, UTEP @ San Diego St are interesting to me... youre gonna get a good read on where teams are. Those Ragin Cajuns have a productive running game, and LSU lost a lot of personal from their Defensive front-7... and is anyone completely healthy in LSU's RB crew? whats the latest on that?
T-Mac said:
posted on August 8, 2006 12:36 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Guys,if Arkansas does end up beating USC I will post on here and eat my crow with class.I didn't have a father,but my mother didn't raise a fool.She always told me to look a man in the eye when you are talking to him and always admit something when you are wrong!I make a promise to do just that if Arkansas beats USC.I still think USC will win,but if the game goes the other way I will eat my crow with Class,Mashed potatoes,and a Biscuit!CFB 2006 Guys!Peace
Mooka said:
posted on August 8, 2006 2:22 PM — 138.163.0.41 — link — abuse?
T-mac,
Nice post 528, but the real test for USC will actually be putting points on the board. I see Ark defense coming in playing with experience and ready to knock some heads. At the same time I think the USC defense will be much improved and it should be interesting to see if the back up ARK RBs can come through. If they do Ark will upset USC in a close game. If they don't Ark will lose. Flip a coin on this one. If I absolutely had to chose I would give the edge to Arkansas
28-24. I could be way wrong on this one and Ark could get blown out. I agree that USC will still be a very strong team this year. I just think it will be intersting to see how the line can hold against some angry Ark defenders. Not to mention the game is in Arkansas.
LSU will be good in the running game this year, but the pass will be better. Ally Broussard is a horse, Vincent is a good option, and I'm looking forward to seeing the 3rd string get some touches. Bottom line...they still got depth.
Heisman pick- Brady Quinn is already being hyped up with good reason. Another year like last year and he should get it, however if Ohio St. can compete in the NC game, Ginn will get it. Auburn is a legitmate contender this year, so I don't want to rule out Kenny Irons either. Watch out for Slaton and Prothro as well. I'm leaving out so much talent on this one. I could post for days with all the talent in CFB right now.Tommie Trojan said:
posted on August 8, 2006 7:50 PM — 206.135.38.195 — link — abuse?
Don't worry T-Mac:
Your not gonna be eatin' any crow or shorts. Arkansas might be the most improved team in the country - but, they aren't gonna be that much improved. Besides, with McFadden gone - they'll have to throw alot. They are a better running team. The SC defense has been greatly improved in practice with all the younger players steppin' up. The defense will be very stout this year. And, I think the offense will surprise everybody. Especially the slew of freshman runners. USC by twenty I say.
Tommie Trojan
Tomcat said:
posted on August 8, 2006 10:16 PM — 69.152.139.90 — link — abuse?
So-Cal I guess we do agree on somethings.There are some interesting matchups across the country during week one.Week one is usually a bit akward for some teams, different lineups, personnel and new coaches etc.etc.
I really dont know too much about L.S.U. vs La Laf. I'll give LSU the edge, LSU is at home.Only watched one La Laf game last year and they got smashed of coarse ever year is different.
T-Mac I really cant comment on Heisman predictions at this point and time.Maybe Peterson if he stays healthy.Watch somebody thats not on any list emerge from out of nowhere.
Hey-TMac and So-Cal What do yall think about CUSA this year. Tulsa UCF Utep looks real competitive ?T-Mac said:
posted on August 9, 2006 4:40 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Tomcat,I personally have always been a huge fan of C-USA.I'm sure you have seen some of the Alabama/Southern Miss games in the past.Southern Miss plays Bama each time like it is their Bowl Game.Truly great games.Memphis always plays SEC schools tough also.I would love it if the SEC would go to 14 teams and let So Miss and Memphis join.I know it's never gonna happen,but I think it would make for some great games.UCF should mos def have a good year.19 starters returning from a team that went 8-5.Looks good for UCF.The Tulsa/Utep game on Oct 27th should be a great one.Tulsa returns 17 starters from a team that went 9-4.Utep returns 19 starters from a team that went 8-4.2 huge DT's in Justin Hanel and Zach West.On Utep you got 9 out of 11 starters on defense who are seniors.My prediction is that Utep wins the C-USA Western Division.Peace
OU Fan said:
posted on August 10, 2006 11:38 AM — 72.161.166.226 — link — abuse?
I don't know T-Mac. Everyone always underestimates Tulsa, and look what happened to UCF, they got beat 44-27 in the C-USA championship game. UTEP had better hope that Tulsa QB Paul Smith doesn't throw the ball of over them.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 10, 2006 5:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
So Iowa St is making up for last year - they had one of the lame-est SOSes: no Texas, no TTech, no OK.
You must mean they have the toughest SOS among the XII teams right... you dont mean, toughest in the Country, do you? (Washington, Florida)
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 10, 2006 5:38 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Lafayette to Upset LSU... I dont know about that, but its and "interesting" matchup. Maybe it turns out to be a blow-out (which is what's expected) but it would only take a couple of thing to break the right way for the Ragin Cajuns to has a legit shot; they got a tricky, but productive Rushing-game, LSU wont be so dominante up front this season, and you only have to look back to 2004 for to know its not "out of the question" to think a Sun Belt team could compete with LSU; Troy St 20 - LSU 24 (and that was supposed to be a 24-point blow-out).
OU Fan said:
posted on August 13, 2006 12:24 AM — 69.179.196.245 — link — abuse?
I don't know. They really didn't impress me last season, and I think that they will lose to A&M, O-State, and Texas. Plus Bill Callahan is a horrible coach in my opinion. The winner of the Big 12 will be either OU or Texas, depending on which Big 12 south team makes it.
Tomcat said:
posted on August 15, 2006 6:21 AM — 69.152.139.90 — link — abuse?
Hey Guys I have to agree with OU fan to a certain extent. Calihan and Francione are both on the hot seat. The Huskers looked good against CU and Michigan late in the season. Coach Frans team will defenitly improve and should compete well against OU, NU and UT.
The Big XII south is all up for grabs and OSU will be in the mix as well.
Saw a replay of the Cowboys victory over TTech the other day and I saw the UT game last year.
Teams like OSU dont get the recognition or respect sometimes,however they could just about beat anybody on a given day, Same goes for ISU and Baylor.
Hey OU fan Ya I saw The TTech vs OU game last year, it was kinda like the USC vs ND game.
Hey OU fan I loved watching the OU vs TCU last year, that was a great game. Hookem-HornsOU Fan said:
posted on August 15, 2006 3:13 PM — 207.119.211.96 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, I'm thrilled that you enjoyed the OU TCU game. But hey, what can I say, OU strugled at the beginning of last season but majorly improved by the end of the season and TCU had a good team. Remember, Texas is in the same position as OU this season with an inexperienced QB, but you better watch out for the Sooners this season in Dallas. I smell an OU victory. Mack Brown and all of the UT fans will going back to Austin or to wherever they dwell crying because they got beat by the Okies from Norman!!!! Go Sooners!!! Whoooooo!!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 16, 2006 8:33 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Damn, Tomcat, OUfan... Callahan is on the "hot seat" already ?!? You say "horrible coach", really?
The team is completely changing its system, in two seasons, he's got Nebraska back in the Top 25... I think that its This Season thats sort of Callahan's proving ground. His first two were all about breaking-down and re-building.
Now a guy like Franchione who had his judgement day last year, he should be on the Hot Seat.So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 16, 2006 11:07 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
F the NFL
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/preview06/columns/story?columnist=maisel_ivan&id=2549750
Tomcat said:
posted on August 17, 2006 3:33 AM — 69.152.139.90 — link — abuse?
Hey T-Mac Welcome back and sorry about your friend.I cant really say f the NFL.I will say that I really enjoy CFB a hell of alot more.
We used to have teams that retaining a basic foundation of players for years and build great dynasties. Now with free agencies,trades,big money and the annual draft, I never know whos playing where.No consistancies at all.
Some of the guys I've met when they were playing NFL only made 18 to 35 thousand a year.That was pretty good in the seventies. I was only making about a hundred a week back then and you could fill up your car for ten.
I'll never forget when the Longhorns beat Navy and Roger Stabach. They also beat Alabama with Joe Namath.
The Cowboys were always our favorite team to watch on Sunday with Don Meridith from SMU.
Hookem-Horns
Go TitansSo Cal USMC said:
posted on August 17, 2006 7:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
OU Fan, Bob Stoops is one of the Best Coaches in the Country.
Are you gonna fire a guy (or put him on the "hot seat") if he doesnt win a Title in the first 2 seasons? Not every Coach is gonna do that, even the great Coaches. I dont think that a substantial reason behind having Callahan on the hot seat.
Stoops re-built Oklahoma quick, no question... not to take anything from em, and correct me if Im wrong, but that 2000 Oklahoma team had a great bit of luck - Not ONE Starting Player missed a game due to Injury all Season! That's astronomical fortune in college football (in any team sport, I would imagine).Go NAVY. said:
posted on August 17, 2006 8:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Is that being a homer, btw?
Anyway, bad news...
http://www.teamandras.com/USC/USC_Depth_Chart_TableOfContents.aspUSC lost their last remaining Backfield player that had any legit Starting experience. FB Brandon Hancock is done; tore knee ligaments, has no more cartilage, wont apply for a sixth year of eligibility, done for his career.
Now true freshman Allen Bradford is the No. 2 RunningBack!?!???
Allen WHO ? I thought this guy was a Linebacker, then a Safety... now he's the 2nd-team RB ahead of guys like Gable, Stafon, Moody who were actually recruited at RunningBacks.Its gonna be fun to watch it all play out.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 18, 2006 6:36 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
OU fan I was talking about Callahan!... Im saying that Stoops (and a few other great Coahces) is the exception. Im saying Not every Coach (meaning a guy like Callahan) can be expected to win a Title in their 2nd season, and so on.
Im just surprised that he would be on the proverbial "hot seat" after the quick turn-around he has done in only 2 years at Nebraski.
Franchione is a different story, I thought aTm was gonna be a legit Contender for the XII Title in 2005... 5-6 was really disappointing. It made me question Franch.So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 22, 2006 9:30 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T, youre "not too worried" about Cal ???
This is potentially Tedford's best team yet. The D-Line, Run-attack, and WR corps are Elite level... and he'll have Nate Longshore starting at QB this time, not Ayoob (baring re-injury).What do you think the spead will be? How do you see that game going, score, etc?
T-Mac said:
posted on August 22, 2006 10:14 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,post #563 is on-point.Cal should be a very dangerous team this year.They are loaded with talent.They have arguably the best tailback in the PAC 10 in Marshawn Lynch this year.Last year he had 1246 yds on only 196 carries in 10 games.That's a 6.4 yd average/carry.Very good production.You really can't ask for more out of your dog!That was in just 10 games played.So he only averaged totin the rock 19.6 times per game.He needs to tote the rock 235-250 times this year.I might be gettin ahead of myself,but if he gets those carries I'm sayin he gets 1500 yds or better this season.I know he is just a junior this season,but if he continues this kind of production he will play on Sundays!No doubt.
Gerald said:
posted on August 24, 2006 9:16 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
Nice to see that the same stuff is still going on just as they were before I took my 5 month hiatus. Oh well ... another year for winners to boast and losers to make excuses. This is the year for the SEC to put up or shut up, with Arkansas, Tennessee, and LSU putting it on the line against PAC - 10 teams. Sorry fellow SEC fans, but after the dog of a season that the SEC had last year, with losses to USC, Georgia Tech, Wisconsin, Missouri, Clemson, Notre Dame, Middle Tennessee State, and West Virginia (not to mention unimpressive "victories" over Arizona State, Georgia Tech, Memphis, and Appalachian State and the weak out of conference schedules in general) the ball is in our court. Oh well SEC fans, it could be worse. We could be ... THE ACC!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 26, 2006 6:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Whats the latest on MacFadden, is that guy "questionable", or "doubtfull", "Day-to-day"? I think he'll play.
Meanwhile, Nebraska is sneaking around the bushes very quietly... and Arizona too.
Oregon, Cal, Notre Dame, and UCLA in back-to-to-to-to-back games to end the Season?!!!! Fugk, thats gonna be good.T-Mac said:
posted on August 26, 2006 8:00 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,from what I've heard is MacFadden just got the pin out of his big toe last Thursday I think it was.Might have been Wednesday,but I'm thinking Thursday.I wouldn't expect him to play being that the game is only a week off.Unless,it isn't as bad as we are told.Under these circumstances it would only leave him about 10 days to prepare for the game.That could be enough for him.Who know's?Every athlete heals differently as you know!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 30, 2006 8:58 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Fugk It. Im going with USC vs Auburn in the National Title Game!
I've been giving Notre Dame and Cal Berkeley the bennefit of the doubt, and USC izzz that good. College Football starts tommorow... My Final Picks are:
- National Title Game: USC vs Auburn
- Rose Bowl: Cal vs Ohio St
- Orange Bowl: Miami vs Texas
- Sugar Bowl: Florida vs Louisville
- Fiesta Bowl: Iowa vs Nebraska- Heisman: Micheal Bush
So Cal USMC said:
posted on August 30, 2006 9:05 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Balls Out... USC is still one of the Best teams, Carroll is one of the Best Coaches. Is starting off against Arkansas, Nebraska, Arizona all that concerning...?... actually, Yeah it is. But that's not enough to say that USC wont beat em. And by November, in terms of experience, USC will have caught-up to ND and Cal.
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on August 31, 2006 12:41 AM — 216.170.43.211 — link — abuse?
i know this isn't the right site for this post but i wanted a fresh thread to get feedback: If West Virginia goes undefeated and is the only team to do so.. (even with that REALLY weak schedule) do they deserve to go to the championship over a 1 loss team that has played alot of top 25 teams? i dont know how the "+1" system would affect this... but just throwing it out there
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on August 31, 2006 7:53 PM — 206.135.38.195 — link — abuse?
All I keep hearing about from T-Mac and SCUSMC is that Cal and Marshawn Lynch are gonna give the "Mighty Men of Troy" some kinda problem. No, I have no fear of Cal. Our defense was a little down last year. Henceforth: Notre Dame, Fresno State and Texas were practically unstoppable for us. Now, there were some pretty fair offensive players on those teams - but the Trojans should never have allowed that kind of yardage and point totals to be accumulated against anyone. We were lucky to have outscored ND and FSU and were not able to do it versus Texas.
Now, this years defense will be greatly improved - there is no question that that will happen. Those guys were really young last year and had lost Cody, Patterson and Tatupu to the NFL - just to name a few. Nevertheless, Marshawn Lynch was stopped totally cold last year and Cal was completely destroyed by USC. I expect for Lynch to be completely shut down this year also. Now, Longshore might be able to make a difference (as A-Boob was the QB last year with some help from Levy I believe) and get off some decent passes to DeSean Jackson. But overall, I expect for USC to just pound these guys. Your all living in the day of Aaron Rodgers. He was a guy that could give the Trojans trouble - but, he aint there no more! The Bears were demolished last year. The game wasn't even as close as the score wasn't. No, Notre Dame might have a chance. That's about it.Tommie T
Tomcat said:
posted on August 31, 2006 8:13 PM — 69.152.139.90 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal its finally here, we will see whos predictions are pretty close.In reference to post # 570 you have Iowa vs Neb in Feista ?
Dont think Neb can survive through the Big XII
Look for ISU to beat them and A&M.If they survive those two no way they will beat Texas.The Trojans should be the real test for the Huskers.
Good Luck Hookem-HornsSo Cal USMC said:
posted on September 5, 2006 9:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Seriously, who is gonna play USC in the National Title game?
I think I jinx-ed Micheal Bush... West Virginia's road just broke Wide Open.Is USC vs West Virginia the most likely matchup now? Thats what it looks like to me. Unless Auburn or Ohio State can also go undefeated.
The Mayor said:
posted on September 5, 2006 9:55 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
By the way.I watched The Godfather last week and Johnny Fontane doesn't get that MOVIE (not "Picture")...and Wolz says it twice, that I didn't remember.
You know what you never see, mobsters calling "shotgun" when two or more guys approach their buddy's car. Front seat is bad news in "one."
Gerald said:
posted on September 6, 2006 9:06 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMC re 568:
The low quality of the ACC is not perception at all, my good man. The #1 team in the ACC last season went 8 - 5, including a loss to the #5 team in the SEC. And the #2 team in the ACC last season lost to the #2 team in the SEC 40 - 3. The ACC has not won a BCS bowl game since FSU beat Virginia Tech (which incidentally was suffering from massive injuries) in 1999.And incidentally, that is WITH Florida State (not to mention two years of Miami and Virginia Tech). Take away Florida State, and the only ACC team to have even played in a major bowl game in the last 25 years was Maryland in 2001, and they lost it 56 - 23 (and it wasn't even that close) to Florida. Take away Florida State, and the last ACC national title was Georgia Tech in 1990 by virtue of beating #21 Nebraska in the Gator Bowl. Not only did Georgia Tech not beat a single team that finished ranked in the top 20 that season, but they were tied by 6 - 4 - 1 North Carolina. And before then, the ACC's last national title was by Clemson in 1981. I am sorry So Cal USMC, but I have lived my entire life in ACC country, and the low quality of play in the ACC is not perception; it is reality.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 10, 2006 7:50 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Knee-Jerk reaction after Week 2:
So who is facing Ohio State in the Title Game, West V, USC, Auburn...
But Rutgers and Pitts look solid, and Louis might not 'need' Bush to the extreme that I thought... the road for West V looks a bit less wide-open.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 10, 2006 8:05 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald, the ACC has the BEST RECORD against other BCS opponents in the BCS Era! (with and without Miami, VTech, BC in the count); that doesnt carry any weight, huh?
Havent I heard that the SEC has the best record against this conference and that conference all-time (but while ignoring Homefield with some confs, however), as an arguement for why the SEC is so great?perception, er, homerism?
T-Mac said:
posted on September 10, 2006 11:15 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Nobody is facing Ohio State in the Title Game.The National Title Game will be Notre Dame & Auburn.Notre Dame could've easily ran up the score on Saturday as Auburn could have as well.Both teams aren't giving away anything at this point in the season.Smart!Both teams have all the tools to make the run.We'll see how it works out.PEACE T-Mac
Mooka said:
posted on September 10, 2006 11:34 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Auburn ain't going undefeated. They will lose next weekend against LSU. I don't think anyone in the SEC can beat LSU after watching them play Sat. They got more weapons then any team I watched this weekend. For those of you who don't know, just wait and see.
Mooka said:
posted on September 10, 2006 11:41 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Every team USC played last year was ranked 20-25(talk about top 25; more like bottom). The upper and some of the lower SEC teams all played 4-5 teams in the top 15 (let's say, the real top 25)last year. That's called competition my friend. The only top 15 team USC faced last year was ND, and like I said, they didn't deserve to be there last year either as shown in their great bowl efforts. Well guess what, it's more of the same this year. USC doesn't play anybody. If USC were to go to the NC this year they would lose AGAIN. Plain and simple. They just don't have a very competitive schedule. I will still keep them in my top 5 for now be/c I didn't notice many mistakes against a pretty good (1st half) ARK team. That's one thing I give USC...great play execution due to great coaching. With that in mind they should be able to compete with some of the best during regular season, so why don't they? Many thanks to the Tex and Ohio programs for giving us a game to look forward to, and showing us who really belongs on top(for now).
Mooka said:
posted on September 10, 2006 11:50 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Hey Socal,
You are banned from saying anything about the SEC for the rest of the season. We officially OWN you. Why don't we start talking about how much hype the PAC is starting with Cal, then maybe if I can enlighten you enough we could talk about USC being hype as well, since we all know they don't even play anybody. Don't give me any ND crap either, they beat a washed up Penn St. I'm not impressed yet.
SEC- 3 PAC- 1
BTW: LSU went light on Arizona 45-3
AllEers said:
posted on September 11, 2006 9:19 AM — 162.129.27.201 — link — abuse?
Not that the competition was stiff, but if you want to see a team that didn't run up the score over the weekend, look to WVU.
They had the 2nd string in after the 1st quarter and played over 80 players in one game.
4 quarterbacks in one game, all 4 of which led a successful scoring drive.OU Fan said:
posted on September 11, 2006 10:08 AM — 69.179.197.88 — link — abuse?
I think it will be Ohio State and Auburn. I think Ohio State will beat Iowa and Michigan. I think USC will beat Notre Dame in Cali and will run the Pac 10, but I think if Auburn goes undefeated and wins the SEC, they will be locked in the title game. Besides, USC sucks!! I think Auburn could run the table because they play LSU, Florida and Georgia at home and only have to play Ole Miss and South Carolina away. They have an easy @ss schedule. Who knows though, maybe Bama can pull of an upset in Tuscaloosa. And I still think the Sooners still have a chance. If they can beat Oregon in Eugene, I strongly believe they will beat Texas and the rest of the teams they have to face in the Big 12. Thompson is improving. The Defense needs to tighten up their shot group and the offense needs to not make stupid penalties. Go Sooners!! Whooo.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on September 11, 2006 10:53 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
re: T-Mac post 585
How can you say the title game is going to be ND vs Auburn. They will both be lucky if they are able to escape the season with only 2 losses apiece. This weekend will be the first loss for Auburn with LSU dismantling them. Remember Auburn has only played two bad teams so far this season, and they didn't look great in the early parts of either game. They were able to take over in the second have against teams that were not deep, but they were played tough in the beginning. An overrated Auburn team will be destroyed by LSU this weekend!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 11, 2006 7:28 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, this early in the season some of what you have to go by is Last Season results, personnel losses, returning players, etc (by the End of the Season is should be ONLY about who-beat-who THIS season, though)... and/but after each week that a game is played, the teams' values SHOULD change accordingly.
Ohio State was #4, lost a lot on defense, but beat a quality Texas team impressively.
Notre Dame was # 13 in the final BCS rankings, under-welmed vs GTech, but impressed vs a quality Penn St team... I'd say ND is somewhere in the top 5, maybe.
Auburn was # 17 in the final BCS rankings, returns a very balanced group of players, but hasnt done anything overly impressive... Auburn should be somewhere in the top 15.Maybe you think Ohio St will lose once before the Bowls and that ND and Auburn wont, thats fine I wont debate that, but as far as which team merits the No. 1 spot at this point its Ohio St, easily.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 11, 2006 7:52 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, USC faced...
- Poll rankings: No.1 Texas, No. 9(tied) Notre Dame, No. 12 Oregon, No. 15 UCLA, No. 25 Cal Berkeley
- BCS rankings: No. 1 Texas, No. 10(tied) Oregon, No. 12 UCLA, No. 13 Notre Dame, *No. 26 Cal Berkeley... now, what the hell are you babbling about?
T-Mac said:
posted on September 11, 2006 8:01 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
I would agree that Ohio State is the No. 1 team in the country right now.There is a very long season ahead at the same time.Auburn/LSU should be an all out battle.Notre Dame makes it past Michigan this weekend and the only other team I can see knocking them off maybe is USC.I will say that Notre Dame and Auburn are both top-10 teams right now.We'll have to see how this coming up weekend shakes out.PEACE T-Mac
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 11, 2006 8:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Uh oh... Mooka youre banned from being taken seriously... for your Clown-ish use of the term "Own".
Heres a partial list from the Clown manual:
- Saying "we" when talking about a team (unless you actually played for that team, right T?)
- Overuse or inappropriote use of the word "Sucks"
- Any use of the word "Own" in the vain of "this team owns that team", "I own you", etc.
- Any use of the term "Nuff said", especially when spelled N-u-f-f (that one is the most comical).So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 11, 2006 9:01 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, joking aside, like Ive said since... always, its year-to-year. This conference thing; it's determined each season, at the END of the season, and its not neccessarily a head-to-head matter. The SEC, Big TEN, even the Big East have performed better than the PAC, ACC at this point in the season - just eyeballing it, the Big East has done the Best (only losses are to Wake and Iowa in OT). Its based on accomplishments THIS YEAR, not just perception, lets give the Big East their credit.
- side note -
Moox, the SEC had 100% of the Homefield... If all other things were E-q-u-a-l, the SEC SHOULD HAVE GONE 4-0... atleast in theory, so calm down.So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 11, 2006 9:19 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Taking the complete view in terms of SOS (and not the incomplete Polls-based view)...
As per the Consensus SOS Ratings:
USC 2002 - No. 1 Rated SOS
USC 2003 - No. 30-something? SOS
USC 2004 - No. ~15~? SOS
USC 2005 - No. ~17~? SOS
... Mook, as for the 2006 season, we wont KNOW how tough USC's SOS is until the LAST GAME of the season is played - we dont know it of any team at this point.So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 12, 2006 7:21 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, you forgot to end your post with "you suck, nuff said".
Take this point Mook: SEC, play someone on the ROAD! Hmm... the SEC is 0-3 on the Road so far this year, could that be a reason they dont??? ~It cant be~
Put that Air Force-Tennessee game On The Road for Tenny, and it l-i-k-e-l-y goes from a "let-down game" to a "let-down LOSS".
Oregon State agrees to a Road game @ Boise State and Loses... if they followed SEC-scheduling practices, they woulda scheduled someone like Utah St at Home for gimme Win. What happens to Alabama if that 7-Pt Hawaii game was on the Road insted? Or better yet, a hypothetical, Alabama @ Boise State!?! Bama hasnt looked too sharp, can you argue that Homefield hasnt helped them out?So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 12, 2006 8:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka,
What was Tennessee Ranked this time last year?...??? Get the point? Pre-season is pre-season, Cal Berkeley in no exception. They proved, so far, to have been a bit Over-Rated after that crappy 1st-game performance. Again, in 2005, practically the entire SEC was Hyped.Moox, look for the Cal Berkeley reference in this post I made way back when...
________________
Posted on March 1 - So Cal Clipprs says:
... Comparing the combined AP/Coaches Poll "Rankings"... with the Consensus Computer "Ratings" 2005:
Georgia was RANKED 9th (tied)... but RATED 14th
Auburn was RANKED 13th (tied)... but RATED 20th
Florida was RANKED 13th (tied)... but RATED 17th
LSU & Bama were closely Ranked/Rated.
As Reference, to show the Ratings arent programmed 'anti-SEC' or something...
Notre Dame was RANKED 9th (tied)... but RATED 19th
Louisville was RANKED 19th (tied)... but RATED 26th
Cal Berkeley was RANKED 25th... but RATED 34th
_________________
... How are you gonna "enlighten" me? - with what? I have no reservations about it! I've even said it about USC and all of that ESPN "best team ever" crap; at best it was Pre-mature, and in retrospect it was a Joke. But thats not to say that USC wasnt a quailty team, Texas was just better.
Bro, youre the guy who needs enlightenment; "USC doesnt play anybody", read post 595 & 599. Get off, fool.T-Mac said:
posted on September 12, 2006 9:55 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,you say the SEC is 0-3 on the road this year.I didn't realize all the other conferences in College FB were perfect on the road!I guess they are.You mention the Tennessee/Air Force game and Hawaii/Alabama.You say put those games on the road and they are likely losses.Who are you to make that call???That is all pure SPECULATION on your part bro.Before the start of this season you were saying COLT BRENNAN-Spoiler??Talking about how great the Hawaii offense was.Well,your boy Colt Brennan and Hawaii didn't make it past the Tide.Get over it!!BTW-The Alabama/Hawaii game wasn't a 7-point game,it was an 8-point game.Nothing personal to you I just thought the facts should be there.The score was 25-17 Bama.Outty 5000
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 12, 2006 10:30 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, Bro, did I not say "likely", I even spelled it out for emphasis. And thats what I M-e-a-n-t.
T, Im in Las Vegas, theres a Billion-dollar industry here that says Homefield izzz a determining factor in the outcome of games. Are you disputing that? Reminder: No One said its a guarantee one way or another... what Im saying is that it Shouldnt Be Ignored, it Should Be Taken Into Account.
About the Hawaii-Bama matchup, I Posed The Question, will Bama/Shula lose to them Again? (which I dont think you ever replied to... maybe you did). And Colt Brennan is a solid QB (never said 'spoiler'), I didnt actually make a call on that game.Anyway, the question of Homefield in that particular matchup still holds-up in that 1-score finish, whether its a 7-pt game or an 8-pt game.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 12, 2006 10:41 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Listen, T-Mac its not only about Tenny/AirForce and Bama/Hawaii, or about the SEC vs the PAC (for the Nth time), but Mooka wanted to get into it... Lets look at it from a wider perspective...
So far this season, look at the teams that the PAC has faced On The Road: @ LSU, @ Fresno St, @ Tennessee, @ Boise St, @ Oklahoma, @ Auburn, @ San Jose St, @ Arkansas
Who the ACC has faced on the Road: @ Pitts, @ Central Michigan
Who the XII has faced on the Road: @ UTEP, @ Arkansas St
That's not worth accounting for?
T-Mac said:
posted on September 12, 2006 11:02 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Alright,So Cal,you say you never made a call on the Bama/Hawaii game.Well,I picked it Alabama-24 Hawaii-17.The final score was Bama-25 Hawaii-17.I think I was (Pretty) close!I've never said that Alabama would be great this year.They are breaking in a new QB in John Parker Wilson who is doing quite well so far.Ken Darby isn't doing very good yet because he has a terrible hip-pointer and his ankle is jacked.They will get on-track though.The defense has actually done better than I thought they would to this point.The Alabama defense held one of the best offensive teams in CFB to 17 total points.With a VERY young defense I might add!Anyway,you say the Homefield in that particular matchup still holds-up in that 1-score finish,whether its a 7-pt game or an 8-pt game.So Cal,You are absolutely right bro.It all holds-up in the end with an 8-pt game ending score-ALABAMA-25 HAWAII-17.OUTTY 5000
T-Mac said:
posted on September 12, 2006 11:14 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
VOLPIMP,What's up my man?Haven't heard from you in a while.I apologize bro.I've been busy.I'm trying to keep up as best I can.You know,it really doesn't matter about the Tenn/Air Force and Bama/Hawaii games being close.What the hell has that got to do with anything anyway??All that matters at the end of the game is who gets the WIN!!!You feel me VOLPIMP???T-Mac
T-Mac said:
posted on September 12, 2006 11:27 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Listen, So Cal I don't like that tone young man!Joking.A MAJOR part of the problem is the fact that YOU are in Vegas bro.Do me a big favor man.Quit with all the odds/favorites/betting/homefield/and all the other Bullsh*t that goes with all that stuff.You have continually said that you are in Vegas.THAT IS THE PROBLEM.Football is about having a PASSION for the game and letting it all hang out on the field bro.NOT WHAT SOME DIGIT IN A SUIT THINKS OR SAYS!When you get into all that superficial bullsh*t than it all becomes CORPORATE and is no longer fun.You can throw all the stats and data in the world around bro,but if you don't have a PASSION for the game than what's it all about???OUTTY 5000 T-Mac
Tomcat said:
posted on September 13, 2006 7:00 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal and T-Mac
Give credit to Sun Belt and C-USA for scheduling great on the road opponents.WAC and MtW scheduled some great ones too.This week the XII goes on the road @Washington State @Rice @ TCU
@Iowa @Army @ Oregon @ USC @ Toledo @ New Mexico
with home games against Arizona State,FAU and Marshal.
The Army vs A&M game and the UT vs Rice games are both neutral site games.Both in big cities that alow beer sales.
Mooka said:
posted on September 13, 2006 12:31 PM — 138.163.0.36 — link — abuse?
Hey Socal,
I won't give Tex credit for your schedule last year as that was the NC and the only team in the top ten you guys played not to mention you lost that one.
Oh, and one more thing,
SEC-3 PAC-1
We own you, you suck, nuff said!
Mooka said:
posted on September 13, 2006 1:07 PM — 138.163.0.41 — link — abuse?
Home field advantage is over rated. The better team will win more times than not. Who can disbute that? I don't care how much money says home field advantage is a deciding factor. How about we look at results. How many upsets do you see on most teams own turf? Many, many my friend. Not to mention those teams that are already favored going into an underdogs house. Almost always they win anyway, be/c they are the better team. That is the bottom line. Quit making excuses for why your conference really sucks. Just own up to it; you know, like we OWN you. NUFF said!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 13, 2006 8:13 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tmac did you really have it that close? That is "pretty good".
Look what Im trying to convey here is that Homefield Matters even in the most generic terms - NOT that EVERY 1-score game, er, close game that a home-team won would go the Other Way if it were On the Road... and Not even in the Bama-Hawaii game Inparticular (though it does serve well in this discussion)... only that Homefield should be accounted for.Look at all of the "close game" that the XII had against Mid-Majors & even a Non-D1A teams AT HOME: OK by 7 over UAB, Iowa St by 6 over UNLV, Iowa St by 2 in Triple OT over Toledo, Kansas St by 1 over Illinois State!, Kansas by 3 over Monroe... all at home.
T-Mac said:
posted on September 13, 2006 8:42 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Yes So Cal,I did have it that close.If you go back and view my week 1 picks I had it Alabama-24 Hawaii-17.Anyway,enough about that.We are fixing to find out this weekend which teams are in control of the SEC East and West.So Cal,any predictions my man?LSU/AUBURN and TENN/FLORIDA.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
VOLPIMP, thats where you're wrong. The PAC, inparticular, plays a significant amount more OOC Road games than your BTEN, SEC conference (and even greater Percentage-wise), atleast as far back as Ive looked, since 1980. And the All-Time Home/Road breakdown between the SEC and the PAC (not including Bowl games) is more than 2 to 1 in favor of the SEC; over 67% have been SEC home-games.
The reasoning as to Why that is, is not important (Im a capitalist), only that It should be accounted for, that it shouldnt be ignored.
VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:11 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
So Cal I'm not disputing what you said, I just pointed out that Cal/UT, USC/Arkansas and others were home and home games. You brought up the individual games and made it sound like the Pac was stepping out of Conference and playing all away games. We go to Cal next year and Arkansas went to USC last year. We have a home and home with UCLA coming up as well. Don't paint the Pac as scheduling all away games OOC because that's not 100% the case.
VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:19 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
Despite what you may think So Cal, I am not anti Pac 10 or anybody else, unless provoked. When everyone was hating on USC last year I gave them props. UT vs the Pac has produced several excellent games, we have an 0 fer against USC but have done well against UCLA, and they had some damn good squads with McNown and company. Deshaun Foster ran all over us. No hate here cuz unless somebody slams on me. In fact I posted last year that the Pac was the strongest conference last year, not the SEC by a long shot. It's all good man. I will admit first hand that the SEC has alot of soft OOC games, UT generally schedules a few high profile OOC's, and then we have the occasional UAB or Air Force just like everybody else.We have Oklahoma a few years down the road, and always have ND or Miami every few years. And yes we play them away from home too. And win there on occasion too.
T-Mac said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:35 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
VOLPIMP,No need to explain anything here bro.We know you aren't anti Pac-10.The Pac schedules some soft OOC games as well.Just like every conference in College FB.You don't have to explain anything man.A few years ago Alabama had a home and away with UCLA.At that time they were a top 5 team in the nation.Bama also had Oklahoma a few years back when they were the sh*t.Not to mention starting next season the Alabama/Florida State series will start.Those games should be absolute BATTLES!You notice how you don't HEAR anything about any of those games do you?People Pick & Choose what benefits their argument VOLPIMP.Why do you think that is VOLPIMP???
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:36 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac,
I said Tennessee over Auburn in the SEC CG months ago... but I think I might have changed it last minute before the season kicked off to Auburn over Florida or Tennessee. Either way I was high on Auburn, and still am. LSU has done well, better than expected in some ways. But Im thinking that this is where LSU shows its vulnerablity.Auburn over LSU: 24-17, I'll use your Bama-Hawaii score.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 13, 2006 9:58 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
And TMac, Im playing Devil's Advocate, if you will, from all sided.
You should know that, with me, its about who Won and who Lost. As far as Im concerned every team that was 1-0 after Week 1 was Tied for 1st Place (except for teams with Wins over Non-D1A opponents). Im questioning the "assumption- logic" behind the entire Poll system! with what Im saying.You know Ive been high on Tennessee thru-out the off-season, and they are 2-0... But really, what have they accomplished that other teams have. Where the fugk is UCLA (2-0) Ranked? At the risk of being accused of being a PAC homer, Why the hell is UCLA not even Ranked?! (and you know I had UCLA on my 'drop-off' list). UCLA, 10-2 last year, No. 12 in the final BCS-style Rankings, impressive win over Utah, lack-luster win over Rice, where the Fugk is UCLA? Where is Pittsburg (2-0) Ranked? Theyve had 2 impressive wins, Oh, but they where ~only~ a 5-6 team last year.
What has a 5-6 Tennessee team (the year before) done to 'prove themselves worthy' that is That much better than what UCLA or Pitts have done? How is it that Tennessee's scoring margin counts in the Cal game but NOT in the Air Force game?That is some goofy shyt.
Do SEC team have some Affirmative Action agreements with the Poll Voters that I dont know about???
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 13, 2006 11:19 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
VOLPIMP, Im not thinking that of you. I believe the only self-proclaimed "PAC hater" that Ive run across on this site is Mooka (or was it Gerald? Im pretty sure it was Moox).
Youre right if you say that its "sometimes" a Home-N-Home, but youre wrong if you say its "typically" a Home-n-Home. Im not trying to make it out to be anything other than what it really is, 2-to-1 historically, and 4-to-0 this season, of SEC teams benefiting from homefield. Last year it took an act of God for it to be 2-to-0 in favor of PAC homefields.
In reality Im not even a PAC "fan"... Im a USC fan. I guess Im a "PAC fan" by association; though being an actual fan of a Conference is kinda strange. But its an issue of equitableness - the uneven distribution of effect of the Homefield dynamic penalizes the PAC, inparticular. Thats what Im say'n to these Mooka-types that wanna blow-hard about the SEC this, and the PAC that.
Again, like Ive always said, its a year-to-year thing... we wont know whats What til the last game of the season is played. Like you, I have no reservations about acknowledging it if the PAC, or the SEC, ends up not doing so great. But yez gotta take it all into account.
Mooka said:
posted on September 13, 2006 11:43 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Make no mistake, I am not a PAC hater. I like Oregon, UCLA, and sometimes CAL. I just think they really, really suck this year. Of course I have a right to rub that in after our wager that PAC would not win more than 1 over SEC. I'll have to dig that one up, but you gotta give up your props and quit dodging SEC bullets. PAC sucks this year. No hating about it.
Get ready for LSU to win a close one this weekend. If LSU beats them by more than 14 nobody will stop them from the NC.
I find 615 laughable when I think about the 2003 and 2004 season. I'll let Rusty marinate on that one.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 13, 2006 11:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, "giving credit" in the sense that it should go into determining a team's accomplishments (and where they should ranked, etc), or a conference's accomplishments collectively. And not "giving credit" as just a pat on the head.
Youre right, after Week 3 things will look different. After the Bowl games things will look different and will be final.
VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 14, 2006 12:00 AM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
Glad we cleared that up! I am SEC all the way, but I'm objective, I definitely see the cupcakes, AF (!), Wofford, Jacksonville State. I can only speak for the Vols, and most of the time if we schedule we go home and home. And honestly, when we don't it's because the Wyomings and such would rather come to Knoxville or Nashville and walk away with mucho cash than have us come to their place. A few years back it was reported that Wyoming made enough from the UT game to support the whole athletic budget that year (If I remember that correctly, don't hold me to it guys). Money plays into these things too. A school like Cal or USC doesn't need our cash so we play home and home. We did play Wazzou at homecoming one year, 94 I think and we never played at their place. The conference buzz is the same every year, funny thing though, seems like every year a different conference is on top actually.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 14, 2006 12:11 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal T-Mac You have to give credit to The Rice Owls.A 0-2 team that has shown alot of improvment.UCLA is right were they ought to be.
Hey So-Cal answer this, is it true that in Vegas that usually the Home feild team gets 1.5 or 2.5 points difference than the visitor?
I really didnt understand why that Texas was favored in last weeks game when Ohio State was ranked #1 and 4 different publications I read all favored Ohio State.
Thanks And whats the line on Texas Tech @ TCU ?
Hookem-Horns OU-SuxTomcat said:
posted on September 14, 2006 1:57 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Hey T-Mac I attended the last two meetings between the Owls & Horns, ought to be a better game this year.Major Applewhite knows the Horns offense as well as anybody and will most definetly advise the Owl D team coaching staff.
The Games this week for The Big XII
* Baylor @ Washigton State Baylor
* Oklahoma @ Oregon ????
FAU @ Ok State Ok State
* TTech @ TCU ????
* Iowa State @ Iowa Iowa State
* Marshal @ Kansas St K State
* Mizzu @ New Mexico Mizzu
*Nebraska @ USC USC
A&M @ Army A&M
Texas @ Rice Texas
Arizona State @ Colo Arizona State
*Kansas @ Toledo Kansas
Nebraska has improved and brought back the running game, I'd love to see an upset, however if I had to pick SC
I put stars next to the ones that look good to me and there are two that are too close to pick
The biggest blowout will probably be Arizona State vs Colorado or A&M vs Army
The Iowa State vs Iowa looks like a great matchup, and the Kansas vs Toledo ought to be a good one. Peace Out HookemSo Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 6:03 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, you didnt come right out and say youre at PAC hater just a few days ago??? You sure?
And you had a "wager" with who?
Why dont you dig both of those up.At this point in the season, taking it aaaaall into account, the Big TEN is probably at the top, then the SEC, then the XII, BEast, PAC, then the ACC. Theres lots of games to be played yet (not excluding bowl matchups), we'll see how it goes. If the PAC ends up being rated last smong the major conferences this year then thats what it is, theres no "bullet dodging" here... theres no "bullet".
So Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 6:20 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
UNLV @ Hawaii - its gonna be a big-time game... recruiting-wise. For some unexplained reason theres a big/growing Hawaiian commuity here in Las Vegas, and Coach Sanford is looking to exploit that with his Hawaii/Polynesian recruiting.
UNLV DBs vs Hawaii WRs; we'll see whats up.
So Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 7:38 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Homefield is typically about a 3-point from both sides (each team), so it could be as much as a Touchdown difference... ei (if Im not mistaken), last year Arizona St "@ LSU" = LSU was favored by 6.5 or 7, after Katrina... LSU "@ Arizona St" turned into a Pick'em game, meaning there was no Favorite, they were evenly matched so-to-speak (some places had ASU favored by 1 at Kickoff). But that particular point-swing coulda been affected by percieved exteranal affects of Katrina on LSU players, etc. From my understanding, Arizona St doesnt have a great Homefield advantage quotient/value/factor (or whatever you wanna call it); it does vary from team to team.
Right now TTech is favored by -1.5 over TCU (the spread often differs from sportsbook to sportsbook, and in "off-shore" books too)
So Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 7:53 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac,
When I mention the sportsbooks, in this case, Im only using it as a touchstone regarding the Homefield dynamic matter. They attempt to put it in quantifiable terms, though, its not an absolute, its not an exact science - and No One is claiming that it is.To put it simply, Homefield is a determining factor in the outcome of games - do you agree?
If you DONT, then I dont know what to tell you... I'll see you when you step up to the big leagues.
So Cal Rebels USMC said:
posted on September 14, 2006 10:28 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy Trojan,
No Sedric Ellis, No Josh Pinkard... whats the what? Who are we gonna see Starting in their place; Fili/Spicer/Simmons/Parsons/Ashley? I wanna see DBs Antwine Perez & Taylor Mays get serious playing time.VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 14, 2006 11:22 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
Hey guys Yahoo is blasting this Reggie Bush NCAA violation story all over it's front page. Allegedly they have a direct link from agents to Bush while he was still at USC. I thought all this had died already, if they substantiate it USC could be in trouble.
Tomcat said:
posted on September 15, 2006 12:12 AM — 69.150.79.183 — link — abuse?
Thanks for the information So-Cal.I have to agree with post #640.Nebraska has shown some improvement with the running game and defense.This could be a good one,I dunno maybe they are a bit overrated.USC looked pretty impressive from what I saw. The Sooner vs Duck game ought to be purty good as well, probably give a slight edge to the Ducks based on OU's first couple of performances.In the preseason and after last years bowl I would have choose OU.
The Baylor vs Wash St. probably doesnt mean to much to the ESPN crowd, however its big for the Bear fans who are looking for bowl bid.These smaller non State funded schools dont have the allum base, funding or recruiting that the larger schools have.Just to be competetive is not enough, these boys want to win.Theyve had their close ones OU, A&M and TCU of coarse that doesnt mean anything.I've been to their campus and met the coaching staff, they are doing an outstanding job with these young student atheletes.
CU vs Az st. whatever ?
Sic-em Bears OU-Sux Go FrogsSo Cal USMC said:
posted on September 15, 2006 5:21 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat,
I know somewhere on one of these blogs I said that Nebraska would be averaging 50 points a game going into the USC-game... and they are, so I do think Nebraska is a quality team. Good matchup to see how USC measures up (not completely sold on any team this season at this point; except maybe Ohio St).OU Fan said:
posted on September 17, 2006 1:49 AM — 69.179.198.57 — link — abuse?
Congrats USC. Good win. Maybe Ohio State and USC in the championship game?? Maybe Ohio State and West Virginia or Auburn? Who knows. Oklahoma got cheated and anyone who watched that game should know that. Mayor, so cmon dude, tell me that Oregon didn't hit the ball. I would let you know if vice versa. Take care and congrats for the Ducks. Go Sooners!! I think Oregon is now 1-6 against the Sooners!! Tomcat, at least OU didn't get wooped at home. Can't wait until November. Go Sooners!! Shady Ducks!! Whooooo!!
DEAN MARTIN said:
posted on September 17, 2006 5:27 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
THE TROJANS TALENT IS OVERWHELMING: EVEN WITH THE LOSS OF BUSH" LEINART" WHITE AND WITH SOME OF THE PLAYERS HURT THEY FIND WAYS TO REPLACE PEOPLE WITH A FLICK OIF AN EYE:I DONT THINK I HAVE EVER SEEN RECRUITING AS GOOD AS USC HAS: THE TALENT THEY RECRUIT IS UN~BELIEVBABLE SORT OF SPEAK: I PREDICT ANOTHER GOOD YEAR FOR THE TROJANS: FIGHT ON::::::::
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 25, 2006 5:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Conference Comparisons after Week 4:
1 SEC
2 BigE
3 PAC
3 BTEN
5 ACC
6 XIIThe XII had two baaad weeks; 15 Losses already! The XII cant recover from that, even if they do well in the Bowls, they're likely gonna end-up in the Bottom 2 among the BCS conferneces.
The ACC stopped the bleeding in Week 4, went 4-0 for a change. They still have enough OOC games left (plus whatever Bowl games) to make a charge back up the rankings; the 5 match-ups vs SEC teams will determine a lot.
The PAC probably started-off the slowest; 6 losses in the first 2 weeks. But they've climbed up since then nicely, the PAC currently has the best record vs other BCS opponents (the Refs incompetence not withstanding; U of O vs OU game)
The Big TEN was on top, quality SOS, solid record... but they stumbled over their Week 4 hurdle, 0-3, and those TWO losses to Non-Division 1A opponents are NOT going Un-noticed.
The BEast has held their own. They currently have the 2nd best Record vs other BCS opponents. Unlike the BTEN, XII, ACC, the BEast has Not Lost to a Non-D1A team. Their remaining SOS looks pretty weak so they shouldnt lose to many more. That also might mean that the wont have much traction to climb higher, or maybe not even keep pace with the PAC and/or Big TEN, in the end.
The SEC has done the least to hurt itself. Its a strange way to put it but at this point the SEC has faced the lightest schedule, relatively speaking. Its seem that it all hinges on the win over Cal Berkeley (and maybe also Geo & Tenny escaping Colorado & Air Force).
Gerald said:
posted on September 25, 2006 7:57 PM — 64.136.27.228 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMC:
Do not buy into the SEC hype. Alabama going soft really hurts us, and so does the utter incompetence of Ole Miss and Mississippi State. South Carolina has regressed, and while Kentucky, Arkansas, and Vanderbilt are not good teams, they have improved just enough to deal a loss to a team that might be playing for something, like a 10 win season or an at - large BCS bid.
Tennessee still doesn't have anywhere near the talent that they spent the 1990s mostly wasting (only 2 SEC titles). I still say that Mark Richt is not as good a recruiter as was Jim Donnan, and that he will not get the linemen or wide receivers that he needs to run the passing game to Georgia and will ultimately wind up at either FSU or Miami. LSU is having problems at offensive line and tailback. Florida's schedule is the toughest in the nation, and Urban Meyer is probably two years away from having the players for his system. And as for Auburn, they are nowhere NEAR as talented as the 2004 team; the media just likes them better for some strange reason. Which is not to say that they won't go undefeated, but rather if they do, they will get turned inside out in the title game. It would actually be in their interests to drop a game and get to hammer Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl, even if their going undefeated might get Florida or LSU into an at - large BCS berth, of which the SEC has only received ONE (how's that you "west coast bias" PAC - 10 people!).
That said, I do not see greatness in many other places this season, so maybe SEC is tops (though I doubt it), but what fun is winning by default? I am just frustrated that everyone is so in love with the SEC this year (when we really aren't that good) and but hated us in 2003 and 2004 (when we WERE that good and proved it in bowl games and in the NFL draft). Hey, I know what I can root for ... the PAC - 10 to step up! Maybe UCLA, Cal, Arizona State, or even (stranger things have happened!) Washington will join Southern Cal and Oregon as 9 - 10 game winners! Sure hope it happens ... if it does it will redirect attention to the PAC - 10 and away from an SEC that does not deserve it ... this year. Now if you recall from some of my posts a few months ago before my sabbatical, I predicted that this year would be a down year for the SEC because of all the new coaches and quarterbacks. But NEXT YEAR ... watch out! 2007 will be the year of the SEC.
T-Mac said:
posted on September 25, 2006 9:02 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,post #653.You seem to have forgotten that beatdown LSU put on Arizona 45-3.Last time I checked LSU was an SEC team and Arizona was from the PAC.Not plotting SEC versus PAC.Just a little reminder that's all.If you choose to mention the games than mention them all bro!T-Mac
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on September 25, 2006 9:04 PM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
Gerald:
Sorry, but the Pac-10 will stay exactly as it has been. The only thing that we are excited about is the reemergense of Washington somewhat. They did not get terribly blown out by Oklahoma, came away with a win over Fresno State (no small task really), and followed up by exposing UCLA once again.
It's funny in this town. You know there are a lot of Bruin fans who get all fired up each off season. You ought to hear em' talk on the sports radio stations. It's hilarious to me. They really always think that this is gonna be "the year". They completely forget that they got drilled by sixty points last year and there is no way to make that up. There are so many people that are so unrealistic.
Hey, I like your prognocation on the SEC though. Very accurate and very knowlegable and fair. I think the SEC has good teams. I think LSU might still be the best team. I can't see Florida or Tennessee or Auburn holding up in a really big game if it's not at home. But, LSU is scary. The Trojans look so good this year because the defense is just incredible, really. Booty doesn't seem to be able to throw the long ball like Leinart did, the runners are somewhat more tentative and Carroll is just not letting loose. But, he doesn't have to. The defense is a monster right now. I can't imagine that there could be a better defense. This is the best I have seen here in many many years. Troy Smith and Ted Ginn go nowhere here. For that matter, Vince Young probably doesn't hang forty on this defense either.
So, we'll see what happens. I can't possibly see USC losing any games. Sorry, Cal will get clobbered. They will not run and they will have no time to throw. By the end of the year it's just gonna be that much more horrible. So, I acknowledge that the offense will not be up to previous standards - but it looks as if this defense is really really good. I don't think that Auburn could even score.Tommie T
T-Mac said:
posted on September 25, 2006 9:12 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Gerald,in post 654 you say that Auburn would get turned inside out in the Title game.Question sir.Which team in the country would turn Auburn inside out as you put it?You also say they are nowhere near as talented as the 2004 team was.To what sir do you base that comment on?One more question for you.Have you seen Auburn play this year???T-Mac
VOLPIMP said:
posted on September 25, 2006 9:27 PM — 208.0.27.10 — link — abuse?
Auburn is scary because they have balance. Sure Irons is the stud but they really have some blue collar guys that play as a team-and that's what wins games, a team state of mind. Peyton Manning was Tennessee's all everything, we had Jamal Lewis at tailback, better than average receivers, and Al Wilson, Deion Grant and other high profile guys and all they did was win the SEC in 97. Move into 98, T Martin gets the QB spot, Jam Lewis goes down for the season, Peerless Price has a good but not great season, and they win it all...as a team, alot of role players on that squad made it happen, with the dash of luck that all champions have to get to pull it off. That's why Auburn is dangerous, not alot of stars but solid players doing their job.
T-Mac said:
posted on September 25, 2006 9:43 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
VOLPIMP,sure is nice to see somebody else recognize.You feel me on that?You are right bro.Irons didn't even play last week.They are deep at TB.I still think Cox is going to have a coming out party sometime soon.That defense is so quick it is SIC.Quick off the ball,quick to the ball,and swarming!!!They remind me alot of that Alabama defense of the 2005 season.I will say this.I know Ohio State is really good and I've seen Michigan play as well.I really think Auburn has the tools to make the run this season.I just don't see another team beating them.When Cox get's in sync with his receivers and that stable of tailbacks.Watch Out.My opinion.PEACE T-Mac
T-Mac said:
posted on September 26, 2006 2:49 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Tommie T,pretty bold bro.TO SAY THE LEAST!!!With the likes of Auburn,Ohio State,Michigan,Florida etc.Just in case YOU missed the game bro-AUBURN BEAT LSU!!!You say that LSU is SCARY.You say AUBURN couldn't even score on the Trojan defense!Riddle me this-since when did the USC defense become the #1 DEFENSE in the nation???You are talking a BIG game bro.You are obviously a PAC fan because you know NOTHING about the defensive side of football.I've seen Michigan play and they look very good this year.I'm not sold on the Wolverines yet though!Yet.I will say this though.You PUFFING the chest out acting like Southern Cal is the best team in the land with the best defense is a complete joke bro!You say (I don't think Auburn could even score) on the Southern Cal defense.ARE YOU SLOW WITTED???What's the deal?Auburn,Ohio State,and West VA would light the Trojan defense up bro.Quit acting like USC has one of the top ranked defensive units in the nation.Anybody can get in here and talk SMACK.Wake up to reality and talk FACTS!!!The Pac is a great conference,but you know nothing about defense my man!Get out of that fog and come back to planet Earth.T-Mac
Lets not forget about the VA Tech defense as well.To name one more.PEACE T-Mac
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on September 26, 2006 2:52 PM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
T-Mac:
I mean that USC will not lose any regular season games. Of course they'll get a real tough game in the post season. USC led the country in defense (against the run) just a couple of years ago and was #2 prior to that. This is a better defense than those two teams were. Against Arkansas, Nebraska and Arizona - USC has only surrendered thirteen total points while the game was in question. Both Arkansas and Nebraska got touchdowns late after both teams were unloading their benches. That's 4.3 points per game. That's pretty solid no matter what you think. Yes, there are other tough defenses around the country. Nebraska got three points against USC's 1st team defense and I consider them to have a superior offense to Auburn's. Sorry, that's just what I think.
Mayor:
No disrespect to your Oregon team: but surely you must understand that it's not going to be easy to come into L.A. and get any better results than you got last year? Chances are that the Trojans will prevail. We get Oregon, Cal and Notre Dame all at home. I base my predictions on that. Remember, USC has won a PAC-10 record 23 straight home games and something like 36 of the last 37 games - with only a Texas team (some sources say that team rates in the top five of all time) being able to bring them down. There isn't much chance of another Pac-10 team beating USC with this defense this year. But hey, I thought you weren't coming down. I hope that it is a great game. Let me know if you'll be here and we'll pound down a few hundred before it's all over.
Tommie T
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 26, 2006 5:30 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
Its about wins and losses, upon wins and losses, and so on... who teams beat and who they lost to. At this point, the XII and the ACC have crapped all over themselves; losses to Akron, So Miss, West Mich, Houston, Army, *Montana St, *Richmond, among others... but not many great wins, Washington, UTEP, Toledo Central Mich? BYU? to mention the better wins.The PAC, BTEN, BEast each have argueably faced a tougher SOS than the SEC has (collectively) but the SEC hasnt had too many bad losses. They've escaped a couple of devastating losses (Colorado, Air Force, *Wofford, etc), so you gotta credit them with NOT losing those the same way you credit any other win.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 26, 2006 6:03 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald, what are you talking about? The SEC has had atleast 3 at-large BCS bids... in fact in 1998, FLORIDA was "choosen" over Kansas St and Arizona who were BOTH Ranked AHEAD OF Florida in the Final BCS Rankings!
Yeah, Gerald, how about that bias??? Dopey.
Not to mention #4 Oregon being passed over for #5 Notre Dame just last year. That makes it two years in a row that a PAC team, er, West Coast team, hasnt made a BCS Bowl when they actually Ranked Higher than HALF THE TEAMS in BCS Bowls! at the time of the selections. (Playing conspiracy theorist, my suspicion is that the home-town boy Replay-Official tried to "Right a few Wrongs" in that Oklahoma game).BTW, in 2004, the SEC was Rated No. 4 overall (BTEN was No. 5)
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 26, 2006 6:15 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac, Arizona is a 2-2 unproven team (not as 'improved' as I anticipated, to be honest). You should have mentioned Wazzu insted, who is 3-1; with wins over lame competition but at this point in the season, that's not much different than many other 3-1 teams.
But anyway, the main reason the SEC is on top at this point, Id say is because they havent Lost to as many bad teams as other confs have... and not so much that they have beaten good teams.
DEAN MARTIN said:
posted on September 27, 2006 6:05 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
I BELEIVE THE OREGON GAME WILL BE A TRUE TEST FOR USC: PLAYING AT HOME THE TROJANS WILL HAVE THE ADVANTAGE:BUT I THINK IT WILL BE A GOOD GAME AS OREGON LIKES TO STRIKE FIRST; THE BIG D WILL GET A WORKOUT AND WILL PRE~VAIL: THE ONLY THREE GAMES THAT WILL BE CLOSE OR IF NOT A RUN AWAY" WILL BE IN MY OPINION OREGON::NOTREDAME;; AND UCLA" HISTORY SHOWS UCLA TO BE A BATTLE WHOEVER RANKS WHAT: ITS A BATTLE" FIGHT NON TROJANS::::::::::::
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 27, 2006 4:58 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac, TommyT,
USC was the No. 1 Rush Defense in the Country in 2003 AND 2004... ranked No. 6 in 2002 (USC's Rush D held Auburn/Cadilac?/Ronnie? to 1.2 yards per carry {42 R-Yds total} one of those times... They held the No. 9 Rushing offense, Colorado/Chris Brown/Bobby Purify/Brian Calhoun to 1.1 yards per carry!)
Even as a 6-6 team in Carroll's first season, USC was No. 11 in Scoring Defense. Every year since, USC has been Top 5 in Turnover Margin and No. 1 about 3 of those times (like Ive said before, thats one of the most under-appreciated Defensive stats in the game).
Now I dont know about this business that USC would shut-out Auburn, but with USC/Pete Carroll USC fans Can "talk big" about Defense as much as they want.
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on September 27, 2006 5:46 PM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
Marine Dog:
Thanx for that bit of history on the USC defense. Last year was the only year that USC could be called almost average since Carroll has been there. Carroll decided to focus more on offense last season, as the OC had left and the defense was so young anyway, that he decided to try and focus on outscoring everyone. It almost worked - except for another great offensive team in Texas. This year we're back to playing big-time defense with Nick Holt back and Carroll focusing on that end of the game more. I still can't see anyone running against this team - and I don't think they're gonna have any time to throw the way those DL's and LB's are comming after the QB. Cushing looks outstanding at DE and Mauluaga looks like the next Junior Seau if there ever was one. Makes Troy Palomalu look like a midget. And, Keith Rivers finally looks like the total stud that they said he would be. Barrett looks way better than Ramsey did last year also. There is no chance to score here - even if the DB's are real young.
Tommie T
T-Mac said:
posted on September 27, 2006 6:55 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,the discussion me and Tommie were having did regard the USC defense.Just in case you forgot,this is the 2006 season.2002,2003,and 2004 are long gone brother.Let's try to keep it current.We can all go back and dredge up certain stats to pump up our teams bro.THIS IS 2006.T-Mac
T-Mac said:
posted on September 27, 2006 9:46 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Alright,you guys wanna keep harping on the past regarding USC and them having a stellar defense.Like I said before,the past is the past.Last season USC wasn't even in the top 10 in total defense.For that matter they weren't in the top 18 in total defense either.Oh,before you start blaming the injury bug (So Cal) just remember what YOU have said in the past regarding injuries.Other players have to step up,everything is relative etc etc etc.
2005 Total Defense is as follows
1-Virginia Tech
2-Alabama
3-LSU
4-Miami
5-Ohio State
6-Connecticut
7-Tennessee
8-N.C. State
9-Florida
10-Texas
11-Kansas
12-Penn State
13-Oklahoma
14-Florida State
15-West Virginia
16-Boston College
17-South Florida
18-Georgia
It is what it is.USC wasn't in any other defensive category either in the top tier.The reason the turnover margin was brought up was because it makes USC look better.We can all mention stats to pump our teams up.Like I said,the past is the past.This isn't about SEC versus PAC.If you wanna see defense SEC.If you wanna see offense PAC.Let's look at 2006 and beyond and not live in the past.T-MacSo Cal USMC said:
posted on September 28, 2006 5:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac,
If Tommy T is a USC fan, then he DOES know something about the "Defensive Side of the football"... you mis-guided____, nevermind.
So lets look at 2006 then...
USC has faced the TOP Rushing*Offenese in the SEC (*Arkansas), and has faced the No. 10 Rushing*Offense in the country (*Nebraska), and held Arizona to -16 yards rushing (thats negative 16 yards)* statistically speaking at this early point in the season.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 28, 2006 6:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac,
The injuries that USC experienced on defense last year is not some excuse as to why USC didnt win the National Title. USC got beat by Texas. Nothing more, nothing less to be said. But, but, when people wanna criticize the program's defensive prowess based on last years statistics, they should be informed of the reasoning as to WHY that was.
And by the way, it wasnt just injuries. It was almost expected that USC's D would drop-off a bit in 2005 - that offseason, they were losing 4 All-Americans from the Defensive Front-7 (NFL/Graduation), FOUR AA's!!! Another thing, of USC's 13 opponents, 5 of them had Offenses that Ranked Top 10 in the Country!... about 8 of the 13 opponents had Top-25-Ranked-Offenses.
Stuff like that tends to skew things a bit.
T-Mac said:
posted on September 28, 2006 6:35 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,me and Tommie T were having a discussion and you jumped all up in it.As usual when somebody calls you on something you bounce back with the crap.Post 673 directed at me(you mis-guided______,nevermind).Why do you resort to that juvenile crap???It's so stupid.If you disagree than disagree bro.Move on and don't call me mis-guided___________.We've had differences in the past.No big deal.Let's try and have intelligent dialogue here.T-Mac
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 28, 2006 6:42 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Aaah, memories...
_________________________
Posted on April 7 - Mooka says:
Word just in...USC should lose every game this year... I just read an article saying Dennis will be out for 2006 along with Reed. With Booty questionable to start and if even if he does start I don't know if you would want him to play anyway... it looks like the tables have turned drastically. I pick USC to get slaughtered against Arkansas... I wouldn't be surprised to see all of these guys start despite the news.
_________________________
Me again: Well Mooka, RB/KR/PR Desmond Reed is playing (mainly KR/PR, not RB), QB Booty is starting (doing fine), RB Hershal Dennis is definitely out (petitioning for a 6th Yr of eligibility)...... New revalations... the projected Starting FB Brandon Handcock (probably thee Most Experienced player on the team) destroyed his knee before the season and is DONE... his Backup FB turned Starter, FB/LB Ryan Powdrell fugked up his ankle vs Nebraska and is Out (did you see the guy's foot?!!)... then the 3rd-string FB turned Backup FB, Stanley Havili, is knicked-up TOO (USC is down to a WALK-ON at Fullback!)... Stud WR Dwayne Jarrett is out 2-4 weeks (shoulder)... Stud DT Sedric Ellis is out a few weeks? season?... Starting DB Josh Pinkard (prospective Stud) is out for the season?... another DB, one of the Harris'es was also Injured in the offseason... not to mention backup DBs/KRs the Ting brothers left the team (steroids controversy), and ATH Whitney Lewis, former No. 1 Recruit, transfered-out to Northern Iowa (aha ha!)
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 28, 2006 6:53 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac, thats why I said 'nevermind'.
Now how about addressing what I said about USC's Defense. How do YOU make juvenile, er, misguided, comments like you did about USC, Tommy T, and Defense?
Read posts 668, and the second part of 673. It aint all about Heisman winners and offense.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on September 28, 2006 7:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, I think I threw in enough "ifs" and "maybes" to negate any jinx, hopefully.
Oregon is building, its growing... we'll see whats what. I woulda liked to see Oregon face Notre Dame this season, insted of UCLA facing Notre Dame.
T-Mac said:
posted on September 29, 2006 2:01 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mayor,that was a great game.USC/Auburn.Typical SEC football.Everybody keeps getting on Auburn about this and that.They have beaten a top-10 team in LSU.I respectfully disagree though on Southern Cal climbing to the #2 spot after this weekend.Mayor,we all know the Trojans will beat Washington State by 4 or 5 touchdowns.Won't be pretty.Oregon has done waaaaaaaay better than the Trojans so far this season.Where are the Ducks ranked??As usual Oregon gets no respect and USC is high n mighty.Not good.Mayor,Who has Southern Cal beaten so far this year anyway???Have they even beaten a top-10 ranked team?I don't think so!The Trojans beating Washington State by 4,5,or 6 touchdowns should not propel them to the #2 ranking.No way.They need to play/beat a top-10 or top-5 team before they are declared one of the best anyway.T-Mac
Gerald said:
posted on September 29, 2006 10:10 AM — 216.113.128.239 — link — abuse?
The Mayor:
Do you WANT Southern Cal to leapfrog Auburn to #2? Why? Excuse me, but what was the reason why Auburn never leapfrogged Oklahoma or Southern Cal in 2004 again? Or why it was such an outrage that LSU leapfrogged Southern Cal in 2003 again? I thought that a team should NEVER be leapfrogged unless they lost - which Auburn hasn't - or played a weak schedule - which Auburn hasn't ... as a matter of fact their victory over a more talented LSU team is the 2nd best victory in college football this season (you could argue whether Oregon over Oklahoma or Ohio State over Texas was the best). There is no argument for Southern Cal leapfrogging Auburn that would be consistent with past PAC - 10 arguments in similar controversies with SEC teams. Southern Cal having beaten Arkansas, Nebraska, Washington State, and Arizona is all well and good, but we all know that none of those teams have virtually everyone back from an 11 - 2 season last year.
DEAN MARTIN said:
posted on October 1, 2006 7:17 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
usc wasnt too dominate in that washington state game'in fact i thought it was going to been an upset at the end: i am surprised their ranked #2: the hard games have even started yet: they will need to seriously improve in offense: the quarterback needs to run when he cant make a play: something usc doesnt do: could make a big difference instead of throwing the ball away or trying to hit a receiver only to be intercepted or sacked; i do know that playing in martin stadium is a hard place to play for usc'as history shows: artificial turf and alot of players get hurt their: its still young in the season and im sure usc will be practicing hard and reviewing this game big time: alot of hurt players this year: but alot of back up talent as well::one thing that is nice to see is that the officials are making better calls since the oregon~oklahoma game: fight on trojans::A PROUD TRADITION::::
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 2, 2006 11:08 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Conf Comparisons after Week 5...
1 SEC
2a PAC
2b BEast
2c BTEN
5 ACC
6 XII__________
Team Rankings based on accomplishments - wins and losses - at this pont in the season (not based on which teams look better):
1 Ohio St
2 Michigan
3 Florida
4 USC
4 Auburn
6 Oregon
7 Louis
7 Geo
7 ND
7 BoiSt
11 WestV
11 Rutgers
11 Tenny
11 GTech
15 Wake
15 Cal
15 Texas
15 LSU
15 Mizzu
15 Iowa
15 Oklahoma
22 Wiscy
22 TCU
22 Clemson
22 Washington
22 TTech
22 Florida St
28 Nebraska
28 UCLA
28 BC
28 Arkansas
32 Pitts
32 Purdue
32 aTm
32 Houston
32 VTech
37 So Miss, Miami, Arizona St, Penn St, San Jose St, Maryland, Oklahoma St, etc...
T-Mac said:
posted on October 2, 2006 11:39 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Post 685,I watched the WAZOO Trojan game.USC did not look like the nations #2 either.That's not coming from me.That's from a fellow Pac-10 follower.We all saw the game,but being on the west coast I would assume you guys know more about the Pac than us SEC guys do.Pretty strong words about the mighty men of troy.
DEAN MARTIN said:
posted on October 3, 2006 6:58 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
as the washington state usc game was close" so were alot of other big games with ranked teams: it is young in the season: but as i am a die hard trojan fan: they dont look like A #~2 0R 3 TEAM: I BET THE HUSKIES GET A SPANKING IN THE COLOSEUM THIS WEEKEND: fight on trojans:::::::
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 4, 2006 6:22 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Heading into this week against Washington (4-1)...
USC's KEY INJURIES - as`per usc.scout.com:
FB Brandon Hancock (knee, out)
FB Ryan Powdrell (ankle, out)
FB Stanley Havili (fibula, out)
WR Dwayne Jarrett (shoulder, questionable)
WR Chris McFoy (shoulder, out)
OL Jeff Byers (back, out)
RG Chilo Rachal (knee, questionable)
DT Sedrick Ellis (knee, questionable)
DB Josh Pinkard (knee, out)Washington's KEY INJURIES:
WR Anthony Russo (concussion, will play)
QB Isaiah Stanback (bruised leg, will play)
TE Robert Lewis (out)... USC's gotta start working on continuity and the youngster gotta mature Now. Dallas Sarts, Lo-Jack, Sam Baker, Steve Smith have got to Lead. Im glad its a Home game.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 4, 2006 9:07 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac, I dont know if you had a chance to respond to this before that other blog/thread closed. So here it is:
So Cal USMC says: posted on October 3...
TMac, Now youre just Trying to Not understand any point... Extent that concept to Week 2, 3, 4, up to Week 5, and so on, each Week til the end of the season. And it becomes a lot more complicate each week.LSU hasnt EARNED SH!T yet, is why. This. Aint. Preseason. Anymore. It M-a-t-t-e-r-s who you beat and who you lose to now. As LSU goes out and PROVES themselves with WINS against quality teams, THEN is when LSU will EARN a higher spot in the Rankings (a blow-out over a chump is still just "a" win over a chump)... bro, its a simple concept. Its about Results, and not flimsy "could be, should be" pie in the sky BS.
Really, Im being a hardliner with this right now. Sure I think there is room for subjectivity like "how a team has looked" BUT it gets carried away (like with you). That comes into play in situations like when theres a tight grouping of teams that are really close in terms of accomplishments, and "how they've looked" can sorta act as a tie-breaker, if you will.
And another thing, how do you apply it Evenly/Fairly/Justly over 119 teams ?!? Me personally, Im gonna know more about USC and USC's opponents than I am about a team like Clemson. The few chunks of times that Ive watched Clemson, theyve "looked" damn-good. In their one loss I think they had a big lead, but gave it away late in the game to BC. All-n-all I dont know too much about em, if they've had key injuries, if they've "benefitted" from a lot of flukish plays, or if their opponents have, or whatever the case. I havent seen Clemson as much as Ive seen USC, I dont have a lot of insight as to how a team like Clemson has been doing in that respect. Now think of all the Other teams across the country. How much have you or I seen of a team like Wiscy? or Texas a&m?Im keeping College Football and the Rankings a level playing field with the way make my determinations - bare-bone Results.
.....
Tmac, Tomcat brings up an interesting matchup that happened, Houston-Miami. What do you make of it? Its a game I happend to watch chunks of (I dont know if you watched any of it), and Houston "looked like the better team" to me... Just like Colorado "looked better" than Georgia in their loss. Houston is 4-1, Miami is 2-2 and Colorado is 0-5, Geo is 5-0... how do YOU break all that down?
Someone mentioned Arkansas' youth/inexperience and that they benefitted from Bama's bad Kicker, etc... how do you then apply that to you determinations? Do you(or whoever it was) have that level of knowledge about Missouri's or Pitts' seasons? Are USC's youth/inexpetience and injuries to Jarrett, Sedric Ellis, and all the FBs, part of your ~formula~ in your determination of "how they've looked" and/or where they should be Ranked?
I spell it the way I say it, its Old Miss... and its Ali-gator Hippy.
T-Mac said:
posted on October 4, 2006 9:30 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Alright,lets put this one to rest.I agree that LSU hasn't earned it yet.You are right.They are a 1-loss team.I still say they would cream Georgia,but that's neither here nor there.Regarding the Bama/Arkansas game I was the one who mentioned that Arkansas benefitted from Bama's bad kicker.I hold steadfast to that statement.In that game the kicker missed 3 field goals and 2 extra points.Final score Ark-24 Bama-23.I also see your point as well of you knowing more about USC as opposed to a team like Clemson.I know more about SEC teams than a team like UCLA or Arizona.I guess a lot of that is geography-based.T-Mac
When you type it's Ole Miss.So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 4, 2006 9:32 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gerald,
You had a "bone to pick" Post 35 in Auburn-SoCarol Recap blog...Ive said that SEC teams are generally over-Ranked by the Polls, Yes - and were so last year. I also mentioned (sometimes in the SAME posts) that CAL was Over-Ranked, Notre Dame, Louisville, and others were aswell. But my point was that SEC teams collectively were )))generally((( over-ranked moreso than teams from other conferences. Fresno St was No. 32 in the "others receiving votes" list of the AP Poll Final Rankings... considering that F State was not even in the Top 50 based on the Consensus Ratings, Id say 8-5 Fresno State was Over-"Ranked" Too!
T-Mac said:
posted on October 4, 2006 9:43 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,I'm with ya on Notre Dame being over-ranked.I really thought with what they had comin back this year that they could run the table.After the way Michigan man-handled em I sure think different.That's not to say that the irish don't go on to have a good season.They were indeed,over-ranked!T-Mac
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 4, 2006 10:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TMac...
Yeah, see thats the distinction I make between where a team should Rank (based on bare-bone results), and what I think a team is capable of (based on what Ive seen, my subjective analysis).I agree, Alabama's loss to Arkansas argueably/conceiveably "should have" gone the other way (Flukish, like Oregon State's 2004 loss to LSU)... but it didnt. You dont count the 'close ones'. Same with USC-Wazzu this year, Auburn-SoCarol too. I give them their due-credit for their Win... but I can criticize their play, their potential, their capabilities, at the Same Time. Winning ugly is still winning. Winning ugly also suggests you might lose next time. But where a team should RANK is alway based on Win/Loss RESULTS - thats how I go about it.
Ill put it this way, if you Asked Me which team I thought would win in a hypothetical re-match between USC and Texas, 2005... I'd say USC would Win. I can bring up a bunch of stuff like - Vince Young wouldnt have a career game like he did again, some injured USC players might be healthier, Reggie doesnt lateral/turnover that ball, that idiot Coach (which has since been fired) doesnt waste that last Timeout, etc...
If you Asked me which I "thought was a better team", Id say its USC. But Texas Won, and thats It. Texas earned the No. 1 Ranking.T-Mac said:
posted on October 4, 2006 11:08 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,I'm wit ya bro.I know what you mean about the polls/rankings.If LSU beats Florida this week than they should move on up.If not,they'll probably slide a couple more spots.What do you think about Tim Tebow and how that LSU D-Line will handle him.It seems like that guy could convert a 3rd down if they had 30 yds to go.Alright,maybe not 30 yds.You know what I mean.How do you see that one shakin out?T-Mac
DEAN MARTIN said:
posted on October 5, 2006 4:04 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
plain and simple" its just too political who is #~1 until we can have a play off" (if that ever happens)we will just have to deal with the writers and coaches votes and in their opinion who is ranked #1 based on schedules: power and strength i will say this that the texas and usc game wasn a good matchup:( for once )they got it right: but i agree their is alot of good teams that are passed up and for what?? we need to have a playoff: in my opinion that is the only way to really find out who is the best: until
then we have the bcs: it sucks but thats what we have: and i agree as the season goes on the games get harder: especially for the top ranked teams:under raned teams have nothing to loose but to get an up~set: whats your opinion????fight on trojans::So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 5, 2006 8:34 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T,
Posting over here so I wont ~bother~ anyone...
Saying "USC looked bored" implied to me that USC just took Wazzu lightly, that they could turned it on at any time... I Didnt See That. USC didnt look capable of that. USC 2005, yes, but not this team, not so for.Tommie Trojan said:
posted on October 5, 2006 8:54 PM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMC:
Did ya see the Arkansas game? How bout the Nebraska Game? Did you see the defense manhandle Arizona? Do you think they forgot how to play? They just had a bad game. Every team does. I say they were always two TD's ahead and Wazzou would get one. Yes, it was too close. But, I don't think they were overly inspired. Maybe Carroll has had so many injuries that he played way more subs than normal - just to try and get out of there with minimal casualties. Maybe it was getting cold. Man, I don't know. It's not the only close game they have had in the last six years. They had about 3 or 4 of them in the 13-0 National Championship year. That's when the dusted Oklahoma 55-14 in the finale. We can't sit here and pretend that these guys are going to lose. The Billingsley model has that Texas team from last year rated as the 3rd best team of all-time. That is about what it is going to take. The team is just loaded with talent. Have you seen the nine guys they already got coming in next year? And, they still can get about thirteen more. Dude, this thing is out of control. Booty has better stats than Leinart had after his first four games. We got four slightly easy games left before the gauntlet swings. They'll be ready. Trust me.
Tommie T
T-Mac said:
posted on October 5, 2006 8:59 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,I really think that USC went into the Wash State game with the same mindset that Auburn went into the South Carolina game with.I think both teams were way overconfident and thought they were gonna have cakewalks.I will say this though.It appeared to me that a lot of the USC players didn't want to be playing Wash St.I'm not sure on that.I know that it get's hard to get-up for games each and every week sometimes.USC and Auburn are 2 of the best in the nation.T-Mac
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 6, 2006 4:58 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T,
The differnce is that back then, USC did look like they could just seal the deal at any time against those "decent"-level teams. Two years ago, UCLA game, it was "close" but I never really sweated that outcome, nor did I for the handful of other times its happened.
This Team (this nucleus of players) has to build to that.I expected the reverse of what Ive seen over the past 4 games... Improvement from Week-to-week, not Regression from week-to-week.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 6, 2006 5:55 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TommyT, TMac,
Anyway, as you can see, I still have USC and Auburn Top 5 (based on accomplishments)...
Either one of those other teams, Wazzu, SoCarol, were a play or two way from the Upset... has Ohio St, Michigan taken anyone "lightly", "looked bored"??? Arkansas and Washington coming up are solid teams with some pop-ablitity.
side note: Ohio State has covered the past 12 games!!! Bet against them!@
THOMAS THE ELITE TROJAN said:
posted on October 8, 2006 12:37 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
HOW ABOUT ARKANSAS UPSETTING AUBURN?? THAT SHOULD MOVE US UP TO #~2 ALOT OF CLOSE AND UPSETTING GAMES HAPPENING: ALL THAT MATTERS IS THAT THE TROJANS ARE AGAIN ON A ROLL: AND I CAN SMELL THE ROSES ALREADY WITH A GOOD CHANCE AT THE NATIONAL CHAMPIOSHIP GAME: FIGHT ON TROJANS: PROUD TRADITION AND WINNING WITH EXCELLENCE::
Tomcat said:
posted on October 8, 2006 4:00 PM — 70.243.161.133 — link — abuse?
Tommie-T Congrats on your excellent victory.Right now I dont see any team ending the season undefeated,You squeezed past the two Wa teams.With Cal, Oregon and ND you could do it.
Looks like Arkansas team has inproved from week one.The Longhorns beat a couple of quality opponents ISU and OU.
Lot of good quality one loss teams out there.
Hookem HornsSo Cal USMC said:
posted on October 10, 2006 7:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
- Ohio St - (4 Home, 2 Road)
Texas 5-1
Iowa 5-1
Penn St 4-2
No Ill 4-2
Cincy 3-3
BGreen 3-3- Florida - (5 Home, 1 Road!!!?)
Tennessee 5-1
Bama 4-2
LSU 4-2
So Miss 3-2
Kentucky 3-3
UCF 2-3- USC - (2 Home, 3 Road!!!):
Arkansas 4-1
Nebraska 5-1
Washington 4-2
Wazzu 4-2
Arizona 2-4Michigan has beaten (4 Home, 2 Road):
Notre Dame 5-1
Wiscy 5-1
Michigan St 3-3
Minnesota 2-4
Cent Mich 3-3
Vandy 2-4After that, you got teams like Notre Dame, Tennessee, Louisville, Cal Berkeley, etc... no other team compares to those Top 4 at this point (6 Weeks into the season).
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 10, 2006 7:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
- Rankings Week 6 (roughly) -
1 Ohio St
2 Florida
3 USC
4 Michigan
5a ______
5b Notre Dame
6 Tenn
7 Louis, Auburn
9 Cal, Arkansas
11 GTech, Boise St, Iowa
14 Mizzu
15 Oregon, Texas, Clemson, Rutgers, West Virg
20 Nebraska, BostonC
22 Wisconsin, Georgia
24 Washington, Tulsa, Penn St, VTech
28 Wake, OK, Bama
31 Wazzu, UCLA
33 TTech, LSU, Navy, aTm
... Purdue, FSU, SoCarol, NoIll, SoMiss, Miami, Arizona St, Utah, BYU, Maryland, etc...So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 12, 2006 7:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Heres a quasi-SOS Comparisons - Week 6 (mid-point of the Season)
Percentage of Opponents they've faced with Winning Records (to date):
PAC - 52%
ACC - 31%
XII - 31%
SEC - 29%
BTEN - 26 %
BEast - 25%Percentage of Games played on the Road (to date):
PAC - 37%
BEast - 36%
BTEN - 34%
XII - 25%
ACC - 25%
SEC - 15%So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 12, 2006 8:18 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Conference Rankings (Mid-Season, after 6 Weeks)
1 SEC (best overall record, mediocre SOS)
2 PAC (strongest overall SOS, mediocre Record)
3a BEast
3b BTEN (great Wins, horrible Losses; 2 losses to Non-Div 1A teams, Two!)
5 ACC
6 XII (bad SOS, bad Record)
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 12, 2006 8:28 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Revised - Week 6 Rankings
1 Ohio St
2 Florida
3 USC
4 Michigan
5a ----
5b Notre Dame
6 Tennessee
7 Louisville, Auburn
9 Cal Berkeley, Arkansas
11 Boise St, Iowa
13 Mizzu
14 GTech
15 Oregon, Texas, Clemson, Rutgers, West Virg
20 Nebraska, BostonC
22 Wisconsin, Georgia
24 Washington, Tulsa, Penn St
27 Wake, Oklahoma, Bama
30 Wazzu, UCLA, VTech, LSU
34 TTech, Navy, aTm
... Purdue, FSU, San Jose St, SoCarol, NoIll, SoMiss, Miami, Arizona St, Utah, BYU, Maryland, Pitts etc...So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 13, 2006 7:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
OU Fan,
Yeaup, Tulsa is derseving of it. Its a shame, but I think only 1 Poll has Tulsa even among the "also recieving votes" list (either AP, Coaches or Harris Polls).All you gotta do is Compare what Tulsa has done (so far) to those other teams... its Not about "Name Recognition", its not about how many NFL prospects a team has, its Not even about which team "I think" would win between this team and that team. Why Even Play The Games if it were about that kind of Crap??? Tulsa, Wake Forrest, Missouri, Washinton St, Rutgers, Arkansas seemingly are being penalized by the Poll Voters for no good reason.
benson bogatti said:
posted on October 15, 2006 6:52 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
as i said before: i hope florida chokes" and they did: now its booty time: usc still isnt impressive to me: their barely pulling it off even though their undefeated; as much as am a trojan fan i dont see how their rankings still are way up their" congradulations to dywayne jarret setting and all time pack ten record in that game: and now pete carrol is the most winningest coach in college history: fight on trojans
benson bogatti said:
posted on October 15, 2006 12:35 PM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
next week usc has a bye,it could not come at a better time,the players appear to be a bit worn down and it will give the injured guys like jarrett.smith,havili,mcfoy and several others some rest to heal their bodies. booty will have some much needed practice time to help work out some of the kinks and perhaps he and the receivers can get their timing down and booty can work on his touch, usc plays its next game on the road against an oregon state team that defeated the huskies yesterday: as for the rankings, it would not surprise me to see sc drop below michigan in the rankings and maybe some will also vote west virginia ahead of usc. based upon the way sc has played of late, that would not seem un~reasonable, however, now that nosec team is un~defeated,it is safe to say this, if usc improves and if they run the table,( and that is one very big if at this point )usc will be in the position to return to the bcs championship game::so far sc is still un~defeated and even though some of the recent wins have not been impressive,they have still been wins: i will take that every day of the week: also to add as the trojan fans are use to seeing a dominant team especially in the secound half: usc has been tested to the max: i could see in the fans at the game:so use to seeing sc run away with the score: well its not happening: alot of hurt players and the team is young: i think they will have a running game once again in time and as booty matures they will st havoc once again: fight on trojans:::::::
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 16, 2006 9:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Week 7 Rankings (roughly)
1a Ohio St
1b USC
1c Michigan
4 Florida
5 Auburn
6 Notre Dame
7 Arkansas, Cal Berkeley, Tennessee
10 Louisville
11 Oregon, Rutgers, Boise St
14 West Virginia, Texas, Clemson
17 Nebraska, Wiscy, BC, GTech
21...???... Texas a&m, Iowa, Bama, Wake, Tulsa, LSU, Oklahoma, Mizzu... So Miss, Pitts... UCLA, Georgia, FSU, Miami, Purdue, So Carol... Washington St, Penn St, Washinton, Hawaii, VTech, BYU, Maryland, Navy, San Jose St, Oregon St, Air Force, Lafayette, NC State, Arizona St...
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 19, 2006 7:03 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Week 7 Rankings - Revised:
1 Ohio St, USC, Michigan
4 Florida
5 Auburn
6 ND
7 Cal, Tenn, Arkansas
10 Louisville
11 Boise St, Oregon, Rutgers
14 West Virginia, Texas, Clemson
17 Wiscy, Nebraska, GTech, BC
21 Tulsa, Wake, Mizzu, aTm
25 LSU, Oklahoma
27 Bama
28 Washinton St, Iowa
30 So Miss, Penn St
32 Navy
33 Washington, BYU
35 FSU, UCLA, So Carol, Purdure, Pitts, Georgia
41 Miami
42 Oregon St, VTech, Maryland, Hawaii
46 Arizona St, Air Force, NC State
49 Lafayette... San Jose St... TCU... Mich St (3-4)... So Flo
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on October 23, 2006 11:00 PM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMC:
I'm just posting my data off the Stassen site. It can run a conference comparison of all games except non-Division I games. It does not surprise me at all that all those Division II games are played at the home of the BCS schools. You can tell by number of games, that the SEC for instance, had played more Division II teams. Of course they'll all be home games. They don't really matter too much - as anybody ought to beat them. But, you can't clamour for higher rankings when you play one or two of those games each year. They do it just to make sure they don't lose more than two games per year.
Tommie T
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 24, 2006 6:29 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T,
I'll look into the Stassen site... But this is the break-down from 1996-2006 (all "scheduled" OOC matchups; not incl Bowls)...
Conferences VS other BCS teams, roughly (incl Notre Dame):
Big TEN - 43% vs BCS teams
PAC - 41% vs BCS teams
XII - 28% vs BCS teams
SEC - 26% vs BCS teamsConferences VS Non-Division 1A teams, roughly:
Big TEN - 5%
PAC - 7%
SEC - 11%
XII - 12%Overall Home Games VS Road Games, roughly:
PAC - 63% Home/37% Road
BTEN - 68% Home/32% Road
XII - 70% Home/30% Road
SEC - 79% Home/21% RoadSo Cal USMC said:
posted on October 24, 2006 6:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T,
Was youre point that the Home/Road disparity between conferneces was negligible? Its Not.
Nor is the disparity between the conferneces regarding the BCS teams/Mid-Major teams/Non-D1A teams in the Opponents breakdown.(Again, this in accounting for Scheduled matchups; Bowl games are ignored. But neutral sites are accounted for {treated as half a game}; XII had 10, BTen had 4 overall).
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on October 24, 2006 7:24 PM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMC:
Yes, I think the home/away think is very even between all BCS conferences going back to 1996. Now, this year was not counted. Notre Dame was not figured in either - as they play mostly only Big 10 and Pac-10 teams. So, I used the Pac-10, SEC, Big 12 and Big 10 conferences as the four conferences to compare. I used the Big East and ACC as games played - but did not compute their data (as it's too confusing who was in what conference in what year, etc.). It was just too much work. But, for all OOC games against other BCS schools - the breakdown was remarkable in that no conference was really one-sided one way or the other. This would make sense - as all of these teams and conferences have leverage when it comes to getting their fair share of the money.
Now, I can't imagine that it is exactly fair for each team. Why would Washington State, who packs in maybe 30,000, want to play Auburn in Pullman - when they could travel to Auburn and get 80,000 screamin' War Eagles in there? It makes no sense. So, I think that some individual teams are traveling more, but they are making more money because of it. I think that the size of the stadium has alot to do with it. It's all about the green stuff anyway. A team like Michigan or Ohio State have got to play at home (they pack 105,000 in). Anyway, it was surprising that somehow it all comes out even in the end.I did not count Division II games or non BCS conference games. Only calculated all BCS teams minus Notre Dame.
Tommie T
benson bogatti said:
posted on October 29, 2006 5:07 PM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
i take back the previous comment on the beavers" although sc rallied back it wasnt enough" they have been riding on thin ice the last three games" well the ice broke" still the hard games to come yet" cal' oregon'ucla and notre dame: atleast if they win they will go to a good bowl:the win streak was broke:: it cant last forever" but sc is 2nd in ncaa history with its impressive wins over the last three years under coach carrol: fight on trojans
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 29, 2006 7:34 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tommy T,
I dont know if youre exclusion of Notre Dame made that big a difference... BUT like I pointed out, Youre mistaken if you think that the breakdown shows minor inequities. The Differences are MAJOR. Going by all SCHEDULED Games from 1996-2006 (no bowls), Counting teams like Temple as a Big East team up until the 2004 season, and Not Counting teams like Louisville until the 2005 season, etc...
Essentially, SEC teams faced 8 HOME games for every 2 ROAD games... whereas (roughly) PAC teams faced only 3 HOME Games for every 2 Road games!Confs like the Big TEN and the PAC faced 2 BCS opponent for every 3 non-BCS opponents they faced (roughly)... a conf like the SEC faced 1 BCS opponent for every 3 non-BCS opponents they faced.
And this is NOT about reasoning as to "Why" it breakdown the way it does, its about What the breakdown is... and accounting for it.
On a sidenote, I previously looked at Conference comparisons between BCS confs *plus Notre Dame* in the BCS Era (1998-2005), including Bowl games this time, accounting for At-the-Time Conference affiliations and the results were something like...
Winning Percentage:
ACC - 53.5
BTEN - 52.0
PAC - 50.0
XII - 50.0
SEC - 48.3
BEast - 42.4
X-remember the Notre Dame factor-XSo Cal USMC said:
posted on October 30, 2006 7:19 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, did you get this response from that other Blog/thread? :
Are conferneces with 12 teams obligated to have a CCG or something? I dont know, but Ive said this before: Conference Champ Games are meaningless, they're redundent at best. They serve mostly as Revenue $ource and not necessarily for the purpose of naming a "Conf champ".
Who says that the lack of CCGs gives teams from the PAC and BTEN an "unfair advantage"? And in terms of what; National Title asperations, may I assume? Wouldnt an ADDED WIN for the winner of a CCG (between a pair of elite teams in the SEC, or XII, or ACC) give THAT TEAM an Added Advantage in Strength of Schedule over the elite teams in the PAC & BTEN that Dont "GET TO" add a CCG Win ???... Hmm?... Ahh... Ahh... Ha.
You following Tomcat? In Theory, a CCG will have TWO of the Elite teams in a Conf facing eachother -- No matter which one it is (both are good), the Winner will Be Rewarded for beating that EXTRA opponent, a good opponent, worth some SOS-points.
And now that the PAC has gone to 9-Confernece games, PAC teams are gonna have some of the Toughest SOSes in the country, year-in-year out. E-v-e-r-y team in the PAC, not just the Top 2, is gonna be facing that extra Conference game (insted of facing a Utah State, Northern Arizona-types, etc).
But there are dozens of things I would wanna change about College Football before the CCGs issue, but Id say, either let a confernece decide for itself or get rid of them altogether (Im a capitalist).
So Cal USMC said:
posted on October 30, 2006 7:51 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
USC... besides the leadership issues (my own view), Special teams and Turnovers have been the critical factors in the team having such "sluggish" performances.
103rd in Yds/KR Defense
87th in Yds/PR Defense71st in Turnover Margin (their most drastic difference from previous season).
A new Special Teams coach is needed badly, and MoFo's gotta stop dropping footballs.
*Third-Down conversion Defense is also lacking a bit.So Cal USMC said:
posted on November 1, 2006 7:58 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Is there a Heisman blog around here?
Colt Brennen and Colt McCoy should be as serious contenders as Troy Smith and Brady Quinn among the QBs. Boise State's RB, Ian Johnson, should at the Top of the List among the RBs, along with Rice from Rutgers.
benson bogatti said:
posted on November 5, 2006 6:24 AM — 207.200.116.69 — link — abuse?
the stanford game looked like a practice for usc: they played everyone in that game: even though it was a blowout; its a big moral booster for the team:i agree with so cal usmc: you cant drop the ball; you cant have turnovers; and the special teams do need to improve or a new coach in that area:its crucial now that sc runs the table: from here on out they will be tested: if this happens they will be in good shape despite their loss to oregon state: close games with the # 1 and 2 teams:fight on trojans:
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on November 9, 2006 6:24 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
A surprising quote from ESPN.c0m... http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2654252 ... but then they have to add that apology/caveat at the end:
- Oregon State's Mike Riley admitted he's raised an eyebrow or two while scoreboard watching this year.
"You're going to get surprised with a score in our league every week," he said.
But, overall, no, nothing has been that shocking in the nation's toughest conference, an estimation validated not by emotion, stadium size or Internet message board traffic but by the Pac-10's season-long, decisive rule of the objective Sagarin Ratings.
Sure hope asserting that doesn't bother anybody.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on January 26, 2006 1:28 PM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?USC will be 6-0 right out of the box, the last four games will be the true test.