Game Thread Southern Cal 18, at tOSU 15 (Sept 12th, 8 pm, ESPN)

[BUCKYLE]

I stand corrected. The '06 Florida team had only one loss the entire season.

So the tally stands:

UF teams: 2 combined losses
LSU teams: 3
OU: 2
OSU: 1
SC: 0
Texas: 0

Of course, Texas only made it to the title game once, whereas the others have made at least two appearances.

You fail to mention that USC has one title that they didn't even have to play for.

 

[jwinslow]

Can we refrain from using words like "terrible" to characterize the other side in a discussion? We are just here to talk about football, lighten up. I don't think that's a terrible comparison at all. The two SC teams that made it to the title game had zero losses, while the Florida and LSU teams combined for three losses each. To most people that's pretty clear cut.

Because your comparison is intentionally misleading. You're comparing incredibly competitive years (2004, 2005) to a year where no one deserved it... and all in order to suggest that USC is getting screwed.

In that example, you are avoiding a direct 2007 comparison because it shows that USC screwed themselves with their two losses. They weren't the victim of conference propaganda, they were the victim of not deserving to win twice.

Now, I think we're building towards severe homerism this season. Many media types with votes have admitted that UF will probably get a mulligan if they lose. IMO, they would probably get the nod over USC (lets say they lose only to OSU) even though UF plays a pretty mediocre conference schedule. If that happens, then we have a serious problem. But I would probably say it is the first time the SEC got overboard favortism in NC berths (the coat-tail riding of the rest of the conference is another story)

The Big 12 has earned berths they have not deserved frequently. Oklahoma had no business going in 04, and were not the best team in their division in 08. The SEC has not earned unworthy berths, other than 07, when they were the least ugly candidate.

 

[Gooey Mess]

I hope we don't overlook Navy before the USC game. I think this game will break the Ohio Stadium attendance record.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

Because your comparison is intentionally misleading. You're comparing incredibly competitive years (2004, 2005) to a year where no one deserved it... and all in order to suggest that USC is getting screwed.

I don't understand why you are accusing me of being intentionally misleading when I'm simply making an assertion and backing it with up with numbers. Did I accidentally stumble into the poli forum?

I'm not necessarily trying to suggest that SC is getting screwed as much as trying to show that SEC and B12 teams are given more leeway. '04 and '05 were years when there was no doubt in anyone's mind about who belonged in the title game, thus no need to exercise discretion by voters who might have some bias. Simply arguing that the years were competitive doesn't do anything to enhance your argument.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

You fail to mention that USC has one title that they didn't even have to play for.

True. However, my point was about the bias of the BCS, thus I am revolving my argument around the BCS title game to prove my point.

 

[jenkinswoody]

I hope we don't overlook Navy before the USC game.

I heard on the radio today that neither the fans nor the players were overlooking Navy. So we're good. No worries....

 

[Meyer]

Just saw this on Espin

Players selected in the draft since 2000:
Ohio State: 77
USC: 66

Tressel is the man.

 

[jwinslow]

USC made the NC game when two of their opponents were undefeated. They were a great team during a great year of college football powerhouses.

LSU 07 made the title game because everyone was lousy. They would not have had a prayer at the NC game if their seasons played out like USC's NC runs.

That's why this 05 vs 07 comparison makes no sense, LSU didn't get in because of the SEC, LSU got in because they had a quality win late while everyone else was losing. Same with OSU, they weren't far removed from their Illinois humbling, but they handled Michigan and everyone gift-wrapped the NC berth for them.

I don't understand why you are accusing me of being intentionally misleading when I'm simply making an assertion and backing it with up with numbers

Because you're bringing up incomparable scenarios and seasons in order to sculpt a mismatch, when doing so is intended to avoid the obvious comparison: whether USC got lightly screwed by not being in a favored conference. They were in the title hunt, and they failed twice. They were not the victim of being in a non southern conference, they were simply not as attractive of a team for that NC hunt.

I'm not necessarily trying to suggest that SC is getting screwed as much as trying to show that SEC and B12 teams are given more leeway.

So who was more worthy than LSU in 2007? Back it up with something besides a completely different competition, 05, when the best resumes were considerably better than in 07.

Simply arguing that the years were competitive doesn't do anything to enhance your argument.

You agreed with my argument that no one deserved it in 07, and yet you're still touting that as a sign of unfair biases.

 

[jwinslow]

Who is he ?

But does anyone want to have this one ?

spam link for shoes

 

[NextBuck]

Gawd so much arguing..

My point is basically that I think that at this moment PC should have at least 2 titles, and if they dont have two titles by the time Barkley leaves then he has left much to be desired from SC fans. I currently think PC is the best coach in the country, and maybe I have too high expectations on him but he has blown it multiple times with some of the most talented college teams ever.

2006: Loses to UCLA in the last game and costs themselves a birth in the NC.
2007: Loses to Stanford which is f**king ridiculous. Then loses to a good Oregon team. They should have had only one loss that year.
2008: Loses to Oregon St!!! While they were a good team, this USC team just blew out OSU and Virginia. Oregon St got blown out by Oregon and Penn St last year.

During these years he has had successful QB's (Booty/Sanchez), RB's (Gable/Johnson/McKnight/Washington), WR's (Jarrett/Smith/Williams/ROJO), and quite possibly the best f**king defenses of the decade.

I am sorry, but if Barkley lives up to the hype and they dont win a title by the time he leaves then I consider it a disappointment.

If LSU can win two titles then USC can.

Hell maybe I wouldnt think this way if they didnt blow their seasons over stupid games. If they lost to Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn St, etc I would understand, but they blow everyone out.

I mean shit USC can make a VERY VERY good claim that they have had the best team in the country each year since 2002, and only have one BCS title to show for it.

What guys like Tressell, Stoops, Miless, etc are doing are what normal programs do. They have star players, good teams, 10 win seasons, etc. USC always leaves something left to be desired on the field.

I'm sorry, but I felt the same way about Bowden until he won his 2nd title. I thought he always had WAYYY too much talent to only have one title.

 

[generaladm]

And who would've thought that Ohio State would win just one national championship between 1968 and 1975, with 31 first team All Americans, two Heisman winners (Archie Griffin, 1974-1975), two Lombardi and Outland winners (Jim Stillwagon in 1970 and John Hicks in 1973), the national defensive player of the year (Jack Tatum in 1970) and one of the greatest head coaches of all time?

Yadda, yadda, yadda, incredibly well written post...

Uh, not sure why I have to say this hours after the fact, but GP[censored]inA? Impressive post.

Not going to look up numbers at this point in the night, but it seems to me that with all the highly touted talent, and the conventional wisdom saying USC has been a NC caliber team every year since PCP has coached, USC players have underwhelmed in the NFL. You can say that Carson Palmer has been a top QB for most of his career, but reality says that he has played in one playoff game in 6 years. Polamalu and Tatoupu are impressive players now. Lendale White, Leinart, and Keith Rivers look to be solid, but not spectacular players. Bush probably won't live up to his high expectations. Who else has made any noise in the pros? I think that OSU's 3* players have done much more than USC's 5*s in the long run. That being said, USC is never an underdog in the college ranks. They always manage to play their best in the high profile games, but the transgressions that cost them slots in the NC game raise a lot of questions. I expect USC to be OSU's toughest game this season, but I will also be surprised if the trojans don't drop a game they are favored in during the season.

 

[ttk]

How about USC losing on the road to Oregon State, a perennial 9 or 10 win program at this point, being an obviously far worse loss than Florida losing at home to Ole Miss, a team that is suddenly supposed to be an amazing program?

 

[TheIronColonel]

Oregon State's wins:

2008:10
2007:9
2006:9
2005:5
2004:7

I was prepared to lay into you for calling them a perennial 9 or 10 win program, but that's not entirely inaccurate. It's just hard for outsiders to maintain that perspective when they open the season with massively embarrassing losses to Stanford and Penn State.

 

[NFBuck]

During these years he has had successful QB's (Booty/Sanchez), RB's (Gable/Johnson/McKnight/Washington), WR's (Jarrett/Smith/Williams/ROJO), and quite possibly the best f**king defenses of the decade.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Aside from last year and 2004, I think they've been somewhat vulnerable on defense for a lot of their run...even with all that star power. I definately wouldn't call them the "best defenses of the decade".

 

[osugrad21]

After discussion amongst the staff, we have decided to lock this thread until after the Navy game.

As soon as the game is over, we'll open it back up.

Grazie.