Anybody else offended

[Bloddrunsorange]

IIs anybody else offended when a team is highly touted (USC) and their schedule consist of Girl Scout Troops (no offense to the Girl Scouts).

How do you think USC's record would look if they played in the SEC? My guess is a two or three loss team. Even if they had a decent opponent, it is much harder to play legitimate top 10 and top 5 teams week in and week out. That's why it's so hard to win a National Championship in the SEC.

Cudo's to the ACC for taking in the legitimate teams from the Big East. Now I feel a little better about Miami and Florida State being ranked. Atleat they have to get ready for more than one game a season.

Texas has a bit of a cake walk this year but this seems to be an exception rather than the norm.

USC has one game this year and that is next week and it's non-conference.

Am I the only one that feels this way?

[GeorgiaPride]

September 3 at Hawaii W 63-17 1-0 (0-0)
September 17 Arkansas W 70-17 2-0 (0-0) SEC Team
September 24 at No. 24 Oregon W 45-13 3-0 (1-0)
October 1 at No. 14 Arizona State W 38-28 4-0 (2-0)
October 8 Arizona
October 15 at No. 12 Notre Dame
October 22 at Washington
October 29 Washington State
November 5 Stanford
November 12 at No. 10 California
November 19 Fresno State
December 3 No. 20 UCLA


5 ranked teams, I don't think that is very girl scout. Plus Fresno State is close to being ranked and Arkansas is from the mighty SEC so... But I also see the point that most would make, THEY don not play and SEC schedule week in and week out. But 3 losses, not likely.. 1 maybe 2 I will conseed.

[WayzUp]

Ask uscrebel's thoughts on this topic. ;) USC does indeed have a very low-fat schedule but it really isn't their fault that the PAC-10 is a power conference wanna-be. If they only have the Oregon State's and Arizona's of the world to choose from to make up their in-conference schedule, then it's not their fault. It's the fault of those who vote them #1.

That being said, I do believe they are the best team in the nation this year and probably last (ask any Auburn fan..they MAY HAVE BEEN last year, we'll never know lol ;) ) because of the talent they have is extremely good and extremely deep. They'd have a harder road in the SEC, sure...but I still think they MIGHT lose one game. I don't see them losing two and I can all but promise you they would not lose three. Not this year, not with that team, no way. They're every bit as good as the press makes them out to be, I think.

They have two legitimate Heisman Trophy candidates in their backfield...just can't argue with that.

[WayzUp]

September 3 at Hawaii W 63-17 1-0 (0-0)
September 17 Arkansas W 70-17 2-0 (0-0) SEC Team
September 24 at No. 24 Oregon W 45-13 3-0 (1-0)
October 1 at No. 14 Arizona State W 38-28 4-0 (2-0)
October 8 Arizona
October 15 at No. 12 Notre Dame
October 22 at Washington
October 29 Washington State
November 5 Stanford
November 12 at No. 10 California
November 19 Fresno State
December 3 No. 20 UCLA


5 ranked teams, I don't think that is very girl scout. Plus Fresno State is close to being ranked and Arkansas is from the mighty SEC so... But I also see the point that most would make, THEY don not play and SEC schedule week in and week out. But 3 losses, not likely.. 1 maybe 2 I will conseed.

UCLA & Oregon are paper tigers (no offense LSU & Auburn fans, it's a figure of speech)...now those two teams would each lose three conference games if they were thrown into the SEC, easy.

[GeorgiaPride]

Wayz you are correct on all accounts. USC can only play who they are supposed to play. I haven't heard of a team scheduling them, that they backed out of. See Auburn in 02 & 03 (Auburn was preseason #1 in 03). USC is that good, but I also think they are just as cocky as they are good. I honestly believe that they will lose a game this season. IMHO I thought it would be at ASU, although close ASU just couldn't play D against the best offense in the country.

[GamecockDieHard]

Hey now!! I was there when Philly had that picture taken!! YOU HAVE NO RIGHT to send this out. He wuz just cuttin' up 'fore we started eatin' that thar pig. We had no idee that thar wuz a dawg at the party!!

[uscrebel]

Why do we have to keep doing this. As far as SEC opponents, right now the only common measure would be Alabama. Bama played the same Arkansas team that USC beat 70-17 and won by a 24-13 margin. In fact, USC scored more points (28) in the first 1:38 that they held the ball than Bama did in the entire game (24).

On the scheduling thing. For the last few years, we have opened the season with Auburn Twice...crushed them...and VaTech...tough battle at their place, but we won. I know for a fact that we have tried to schedule games with Texas, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Virginia, LSU, and Florida State. I do not know the reasons that the games did not make the schedule, so I will not accuse anyone of ducking the Trojans.

Everyone on this board knows how much I love SEC football and that I believe it to be generally superior to Pac10 football. However, if you choose to be offended that is your perogative. If you wish to continue the moronic ramblings, be my guest.

It is not clear to be at this point that any team can beat USC. I have said all year that they will lose a game...and I still think it will happen. But, I can tell you that it would not be the Vols. So far they have had two games in which they spotted the other team 18 and 21 points, only to roar back and rip them a new one. The problem most SEC teams would have with USC would not be defense...they could probably defend them pretty well...they problem they would have is scoring enough points quickly enough to get and maintain a lead.

No, USC will not be undefeated this year, but get off of your whiny, sniffling stool and admit that USC is a very good football team.

[BAMAMARINE]

Why do we have to keep doing this. As far as SEC opponents, right now the only common measure would be Alabama. Bama played the same Arkansas team that USC beat 70-17 and won by a 24-13 margin. In fact, USC scored more points (28) in the first 1:38 that they held the ball than Bama did in the entire game (24).

Although I do agree with some of the post I dont agree with this part of it.
Do you think the USC offense could have put 17 points on the Florida defense in the first quarter? Point being Alabama played a great game against Florida and a not so great game against Arkansas, and contrary to some belief Coach Shula has class and would not have run the score up as USC did. I am not trying to start an arguement about just putting in my .02 cents.
and yes they are a very good football team.

[thethrill]

USC has some great offensive players, that's a given. Defense, I just don't see it. To even compare the Pac-10 with the SEC is laughable. There are HS teams in Fla.&Ga. with better defenses than Ari.St., Ore., Was, etc. The main problem I have with USC is not really their schedule, because they can't help that their in the Pac-10, but the fact they say their going for their 3rd Nat. Champ. in a row. Any serious minded football fan knows the 1st one they claim was LSU's, but it was split. And the 2nd, everyone knows USC should have been playing AU, not their fault I know, but last years win convinced me of nothing. It would have been interesting to see how they could have stopped Cadillac and Ronnie Brown. Until USC plays the SEC or ACC champ for the Nat. Championship I'll never be convinced.

[uscrebel]

USC has some great offensive players, that's a given. Defense, I just don't see it. To even compare the Pac-10 with the SEC is laughable. There are HS teams in Fla.&Ga. with better defenses than Ari.St., Ore., Was, etc. The main problem I have with USC is not really their schedule, because they can't help that their in the Pac-10, but the fact they say their going for their 3rd Nat. Champ. in a row. Any serious minded football fan knows the 1st one they claim was LSU's, but it was split. And the 2nd, everyone knows USC should have been playing AU, not their fault I know, but last years win convinced me of nothing. It would have been interesting to see how they could have stopped Cadillac and Ronnie Brown. Until USC plays the SEC or ACC champ for the Nat. Championship I'll never be convinced.

Once again, we can try the common opponent thing. USC opened the season against VaTech and won 24-13...with 3 of VaTech points and 10 of USC's points coming in the last 8 minutes. VaTech led 10-7 at the half, but USC scored 2 minutes into the second half and led the rest of the way through. They outgained VaTech 294 to 373 in total offense.

Auburn played VaTech in the last game of the season. They won 16-13 with Auburn only able to manage 3 FG's and one TD. VaTech outgained Auburn 399 to 275 in total offense. As to whether or not USC could have stopped Brown and Williams....VaTech held them to 68 and 61 yards respectively...and held Campbell to 189 yards passing. I do not believe that last year's defense would have performed less admirably than VaTech's.

Interestingly, I think that VaTech may be a better team right now than USC.

As to whether or not Championships claimed were split...we'll be happy to concede that if everyone else does...we'll still have ten others and a pile of Heismans...we're okay with that.

[thethrill]

I've never been a big believer in the common opponent thing. And I don't think comparing how USC/Auburn played against VTech last year is really fair to AU. I believe AU was probaly having a hard time getting excited about playing VT after learning they wouldn't be playing USC for the NC. But after saying all that, there's no denying USC is good I just wished these championships were decided on the field. Playoffs? But then again we would probaly just end up arguing about who should be in them.

[uscrebel]

I've never been a big believer in the common opponent thing. And I don't think comparing how USC/Auburn played against VTech last year is really fair to AU. I believe AU was probaly having a hard time getting excited about playing VT after learning they wouldn't be playing USC for the NC. But after saying all that, there's no denying USC is good I just wished these championships were decided on the field. Playoffs? But then again we would probaly just end up arguing about who should be in them.

So what you are saying is that while empiracle evidence exists...you are not a believer. Rather, you say that Auburn had a hard time getting excited about the game because they couldn't play USC. The year before, when the same thing happened to USC...who wanted VERY badly to play LSU....they put on their football suits and showed Michigan how to play football.

The difference between champions and very good teams is that they do not have to have a reason to show up other than the fact that there is a game to play.

[thethrill]

So what you are saying is that while empiracle evidence exists...you are not a believer. Rather, you say that Auburn had a hard time getting excited about the game because they couldn't play USC. The year before, when the same thing happened to USC...who wanted VERY badly to play LSU....they put on their football suits and showed Michigan how to play football.

The difference between champions and very good teams is that they do not have to have a reason to show up other than the fact that there is a game to play.
What I'm saying is "common opponents" is not always a reliable barometer. For instance, how AU/USC matched up against VT last year, has nothing to do with how AU would've matched up against USC. And as for USC showing Michigan how to play football, I think the key word there is Michigan.

[usafbamafan]

I think the SEC is having a down year. I know everyone will rip me for this, but I think we are weaker than the ACC and PAC-10 this year. Look at the matchups we have had so far.

LSU barely scraped by Arizona ST. and should have lost.
USC destroyed Arkansas
Georgia Tech beat Auburn

Also look at the fact that Alabama is doing so well this year. While I would love to believe that we are "back". I think it has a lot more to do with new systems and/or new QB's in the SEC this year. Alabama is really the only decent team that has experienced leaders on offense and a system that has been in place for 3 years.

The SEC is weak this year and USC is the best team in the nation, bar none. :cool:

Flame away! :(

[Cianne]

So what you are saying is that while empiracle evidence exists...you are not a believer.

Isn't it spelled empirical :p

[thethrill]

I think the SEC is having a down year. I know everyone will rip me for this, but I think we are weaker than the ACC and PAC-10 this year. Look at the matchups we have had so far.

LSU barely scraped by Arizona ST. and should have lost.
USC destroyed Arkansas
Georgia Tech beat Auburn

Also look at the fact that Alabama is doing so well this year. While I would love to believe that we are "back". I think it has a lot more to do with new systems and/or new QB's in the SEC this year. Alabama is really the only decent team that has experienced leaders on offense and a system that has been in place for 3 years.

The SEC is weak this year and USC is the best team in the nation, bar none. :cool:

Flame away! :(
You might have an argument with the ACC, but with Miami's and FSU's offenses stuggling, I still think the SEC comes out on top. Although VaTech is the real deal. But you lose me there on the Pac-10, that's ridiculous. I know USC is great and all, but can you imagine Ore., Cal, ASU, UCLA etc. coming into the Swamp, Sanford, Neyland, Bryant-Denny, Death Valley, etc. It would get ugly real quick.

[usafbamafan]

You might have an argument with the ACC, but with Miami's and FSU's offenses stuggling, I still think the SEC comes out on top. Although VaTech is the real deal. But you lose me there on the Pac-10, that's ridiculous. I know USC is great and all, but can you imagine Ore., Cal, ASU, UCLA etc. coming into the Swamp, Sanford, Neyland, Bryant-Denny, Death Valley, etc. It would get ugly real quick.

I can picture it, and I think they would all compete pretty well with most any team in the SEC. I know many will disagree with me. It's just an opinion.....

[OrangeCrush]

IIs anybody else offended when a team is highly touted (USC) and their schedule consist of Girl Scout Troops (no offense to the Girl Scouts).

How do you think USC's record would look if they played in the SEC? My guess is a two or three loss team. Even if they had a decent opponent, it is much harder to play legitimate top 10 and top 5 teams week in and week out. That's why it's so hard to win a National Championship in the SEC.

USC has one game this year and that is next week and it's non-conference.

Am I the only one that feels this way?

USC has plenty of meat on their schedule. Arizona State could have beat them last week, but turned the ball over 5 times. Cal should be able to play with the Trojans. UCLA is back on the upswing and should provide a stiffer test than they have in the past. Notre Dame is a top 15 team and should provide a challenge as well. What people are discounting is just how good the Trojans are. Pete Carroll has done a fantastic job.

As far as USC playing in the SEC, there is not a team in the SEC that USC cannot beat. It does not mean they would go undefeated, but all of the top teams(minus Bama for now) have shown areas of weakness. You have to play some excellent football if you are going to take out the Trojans.

USC will raise the level of play in the Pac-10. While it has looked extremely one-sided in alot of games, their play will force the other schools to get better to compete. Cal, UCLA, and Arizona St all look to be going in that direction. I think the conferneces are a lot closer in terms of quality than most southern fans want to give credit.

[uscrebel]

Isn't it spelled empirical :p


SHADDDUP!!!

[Cianne]

Hey, when I get a chance to show up an older, more intelligent person, I'm going to take it :)

[uscrebel]

Hey, when I get a chance to show up an older, more intelligent person, I'm going to take it :)

Let me know if you ever find one on this board. :cool: :cool:

[darrel055]

i agree usc does not have the schedule to be ranked #1 if they played in a real conference they could score that many points that quick against a good sec defense

[uscrebel]

i agree usc does not have the schedule to be ranked #1 if they played in a real conference they could score that many points that quick against a good sec defense

Your analysis is both novel and iconoclastic and I do not remember ever hearing someone suggest this before. Upon reading your post, I am sure that the entire sportswriting and coaching establishment will admit that you are much wiser than they and will promptly drop USC out of the Top 25.

Because your intellectual prowess and ability to articulate your position is so sophisticated, the Nobel Prize Committee is wondering where can you be reached because they have questions about the meaning of life and the origins of the universe.
:cool: :cool:

[Cianne]

Let me know if you ever find one on this board. :cool: :cool:

Fine, I just like to show up an old man :p

[uscrebel]

Fine, I just like to show up an old man :p

You're a pup. Everybody's an old man to you!

:p :p

[rabidcock]

Upon circumspection, although the Pac-10 does not have 5 teams that are or have been in the top ten (almost as many in the top FIVE) this season,as the SEC does, they still play a pretty competitive schedule. They can't help it that the Pac-10 is relatively week compared to the SEC and a few other conferences. If they can go undefeated with their schedule and then beat the #2 team in the nation in a bowl game, they deserve to be the National Champions. While there is OBVIOUSLY a greater chance of them losing at least one game in the SEC, remember that Auburn didn't lose a game last year (even though the LSU game was a miracle they easily could have lost), I believe they could stand up to SEC defenses and claim victory in all of them, for they are one of the most dominating teams to arise in the last decade.

[Bloddrunsorange]

Well, I guess the thing that sours me on USC is that first crybaby split championship with LSU. Everyone agreed going in how the National Championship was to be decided. However when the bullet hit the bone, USC cried foul and the Championship was split. If that was a reasonable way to solve it, then why wasn't last years split with Auburn? Clearly, USC should have played Auburn but it didn't happen that way.

In any event, I will never believe that USC is the #1 team in the country. Right now, Texas is followed by Va tech. If it were played right now, those two teams should decide it.

I hate the entire polling system. Too many biases and extraneous variables enter into any opinion system. Sure the Pac 10 is going to have teams ranked in the top ten. There are enough voters with close connections with ABC to keep it that way. Remember, the BCS is owned by ABC. It's hard to promote a game where ranked teams are not involved unless there is some sort of natual rivalry.

I would go along with a polling system to set the field for a 16 or 8 team play off and there is no real reason that it could not be done. The Bowl games could host the playoff games. It would benefit attendance at bowl games, tv monies and could be used to eliminate any home field advantage for either team. In any event, I think a squabble between who was the 16th and 17th ranked teams would be a little eaiser to swallow over the difference between the 1st and 2nd team.

[uscrebel]

[snip]
I hate the entire polling system. Too many biases and extraneous variables enter into any opinion system. Sure the Pac 10 is going to have teams ranked in the top ten. There are enough voters with close connections with ABC to keep it that way. Remember, the BCS is owned by ABC. It's hard to promote a game where ranked teams are not involved unless there is some sort of natual rivalry.
[snip]


As far as your notion that USC "whined" itself into a split championship, show me quotes, other than from a fan board, that this happened. The morning after the LSU/Oklahoma match-up was announced, Pete Carroll was interviewed and he said that he did not understand the BCS formula and it had no bearing on the team goals, which had been to win the Pac10 and go to the Rose Bowl. When one player, Mike Williams, made a critical comment to the media, Carroll disciplined him and had him retract his comment.

Your suggestion that the Pac10 somehow has "enough voters with close connections with ABC" to control the voting is one of the most absurd, yokel comments that I have heard in years. Since 1991, there have been only two teams from the Pac10 named as champion, while four SEC teams have won. If your conspiracy theory is correct, then the SEC must be involved with ABC, not the Pac10.

I know that you and ole Smokey don't get down out of the hills very often, but here's a news flash....the stuff that you see on the television is fiction. Contrary to your view of the West Coast, most of us are not in the movies, few of us even know anyone in show business, and the overwhelming majority of us actually have to work for a living.

As a little side note, USC does have a network connection. The Tisch Family are donors and alums. Lawrence Tisch was the founder of Loews Corp and the former president of CBS. You remember CBS, right? The company that televises SEC football.

Finally, on the split title thing, since 1925 the title has been split 22 times. College football survived.

It's a warm day out here. Think I wander down to the ceement pond and go swimming, with Ellie Mae.

GOI

[supergenius]

When I grow up I wanna be just like rebel! RTR

[uscrebel]

When I grow up I wanna be just like rebel! RTR

Thanks SuperG...

BTW, your new avatar is really funny... in a creepy sort of way.

[fernandomike]

Thanks SuperG...

BTW, your new avatar is really funny... in a creepy sort of way.

That's SuperG's baby picture. I'm sure you noticed that he bears a striking resemblance to a remarkable football coach only young superG is fatter and a bit uglier.

[supergenius]

That's SuperG's baby picture. I'm sure you noticed that he bears a striking resemblance to a remarkable football coach only young superG is fatter and a bit uglier.
That will be enough out of you nando! RTR

[uscrebel]

That will be enough out of you nando! RTR

Yeah Nando...SuperG ain't fat!!
;)

[fernandomike]

Yeah Nando...SuperG ain't fat!!
;)

You're right, he's a svelte 5'8, 265 lbs. You will find him pictured on the October cover of Muscle and Fitness magazine. :rolleyes:

[rabidcock]

He's svelte.....he's 5'8, 265 lbs.

Incongruity at it's finest! :D

[SeattleGamecocks]

Its time to give USC their due. Being out here in Pac 10 land, trust me I am tired of hearing about the supposed "east coast bias" and have argued at length that the Pac10 is inferior. But USC has earned their place at the top. Give them an SEC schedule and I think they come out w/ 1 loss... and whoeever beat them probably loses the following week. I hope either UGA or Bama remains undefeated through the season and SEC championship and we can have a BCS title game w/ SEC's #1 against USC. But then if TX goes undefeated too, we have another reason for to say screw the BCS.