• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

How did you guys lose to USC?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
There have been some good posts in this thread... jwins and lordjeff made outstanding contributions.

But it comes down to this:
Ohio State got much better after they played USC (long after)

USC got much worse after playing the Buckeyes (soon after)
​
Just another reason why the transitive property of algebra does not apply to football.



To put it in mathematical terms:


If
  1. a > b and
  2. b > c, then
  3. a > c
But to apply this to football assumes:
  1. That "a" in the first inequality (Oregon) is the same as "a" in the third inequality. (possibly true)
  2. and that "b" in the first inequality (USC) is the same as "b" in the second inequality. (patently false, and DSA proves it)
  3. and that "c" in the second inequality (Ohio State) is the same as "c" in the third inequality. (also disproven by DSA)
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks;1647837; said:
There have been some good posts in this thread... jwins and lordjeff made outstanding contributions.

But it comes down to this:
Ohio State got much better after they played USC (long after)

USC got much worse after playing the Buckeyes (soon after)
​
Just another reason why the transitive property of algebra does not apply to football.



To put it in mathematical terms:


If
  1. a > b and
  2. b > c, then
  3. a > c
But to apply this to football assumes:
  1. That "a" in the first inequality (Oregon) is the same as "a" in the third inequality. (possibly true)
  2. and that "b" in the first inequality (USC) is the same as "b" in the second inequality. (patently false, and DSA proves it)
  3. and that "c" in the second inequality (Ohio State) is the same as "c" in the third inequality. (also disproven by DSA)
Click to expand...


Unless of course A=OSU and C=scUM then A>C to infinity...always. Paint the endzones.
 
Upvote 0
Why did we lose?

Look right here:
Up 12-10,

1st-10, USC10 6:07 T. Pryor rushed to the right for no gain. T. Pryor fumbled. D. Herron recovered fumble
2nd-18, USC18 6:07 T. Pryor passed to B. Saine to the right for 13 yard gain
3rd-5, USC5 5:11 T. Pryor incomplete pass to the left
4th-5, USC5 4:49 A. Pettrey kicked a 22-yard field goal

Score a TD there, and it's 19-10 and we win. No doubt in my mind.
 
Upvote 0
osuteke;1647901; said:
Getting a spot foul, loss of down, AND ten yard penalty for intentional grounding doesn't help when you're trying to drive down the field to win the game.
Click to expand...

Grounding is supposed to be a spot foul and loss of down only, but IIRC, the refs actually marked off some yardage by mistake on that play.
 
Upvote 0
We lost because we let Barkley think he was a good QB as a freshman. And Pryor looked like a freshman. Everyone else that played USC knew how to exploit his playing, seeing as how that was the first time any one got to see his real playing style.
 
Upvote 0
We lost because we let Barkley think he was a good QB as a freshman. And Pryor looked like a freshman. Everyone else that played USC knew how to exploit his playing, seeing as how that was the first time any one got to see his real playing style.
Click to expand...
One winning drive after getting dominated all game, on a drive including a CB blitz no less, and we "let him" vs others "exploit[ing] him" ??? really?
 
Upvote 0
IMHO, all of the posts focusing on the events of the game are missing the point by miles. Yes, there were individual events on that wretched evening that affected the outcome. But the reason that the question was asked was because the person asking finds the outcome surprising, given the events of January 1. To answer the question properly, you have to consider where the question is coming from, thus taking into consideration why the outcome was a surprise.

The main reason that Ohio State did not beat USC is that USC was a better team that day. The main reason that this fact is a surprise to anyone is that Ohio State played better than USC did for most of the remainder of the season (and DSA comes as close to proof of that as is possible).

Several posts have addressed these points already. Much of the rest sounds like a lot of woulda coulda shoulda with a little whining thrown in here and there.
 
Upvote 0
kippy1040;1648362; said:
I have always wondered, what if we had beat USC, would our season have gone in a different direction? I think the Purdue game was the real eye opener for Ohio State.
Click to expand...

USC has tons of talent..Yes,a freshman qb as well at the time..They made plays when they had to. They have a ton of experience of doing that throughout the years..OSU played strong...Things happen.The purdue game however is one that will definitely be the ? mark for me
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top