Trojan Farce

[MadRat]

Trojan Farce
Why USC is overrated

By Jonathan Chait
Posted Friday, Dec. 30, 2005, at 11:06 AM ET

Excerpt:

"For instance, the ESPN crew discussed a hypothetical game between USC and the 1997 Michigan Wolverines. That Michigan team had a spotty offense, but its defense was phenomenal, allowing less than nine points a game. The Wolverines had probably the best pass defense in college history, with 23 interceptions and just five touchdown passes allowed. It had Charles Woodson, who bucked history by winning the Heisman Trophy as a defensive player, along with three other future NFL cornerbacks. They held what was then the highest-scoring team in the history of the Pac 10 to 16 points.

What did ESPN's Kirk Herbstreit predict as the final score? 34-17, Trojans. ESPN's Mark May? USC, 49-14. Will the reader please note that mediocre defenses like Arizona State and Notre Dame held USC well below 49 points this year?"

----------------------------

USC - Texas Thread

AnandTech Moderator

-------------------------

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Most certainly overrated.

USC beat Notre Dame only because of two blown calls at the end of the game... a close enough call to evidence USC's weaknesses.

This reminds me of the hype that surrounded the '93 Florida State team led by Charlie Ward.... the same talking heads now were then saying they were the best college team ever
and could probably beat a number of NFL teams. Funnily enough Notre Dame also exposed that hype when they beat FSU by running the ball straight down their throat. Man that was a classic game.
And thankfully I never heard another peep about FSU being the best ever.

 

[Zebo]

We shall see. I think they can play just about as well as they want too...took a couple off weeks. But you don't go 36-0 by being "overrated"

 

[BlancoNino]

Yeah it's always whatever team in the present year is dominating. They're somehow always the best team ever. I think the 1991 Washington Huskies would have KILLED this years Trojans. Do I think they're overrated in this case? Yes. But, do I think they are the best team in the country right now? Yes. Are they going to beat Texas? Yes. But, they are certainly not the best team of all time, especially since most of the teams in college football are sort of down this year.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Yeah it's always whatever team in the present year is dominating. They're somehow always the best team ever. I think the 1991 Washington Huskies would have KILLED this years Trojans. Do I think they're overrated in this case? Yes. But, do I think they are the best team in the country right now? Yes. Are they going to beat Texas? Yes. But, they are certainly not the best team of all time, especially since most of the teams in college football are sort of down this year.

Agreed. Football unites.

 

[MadRat]

Are teams really down are OR are you just used to seeing the typical 105 scholarship powerhouses of yesteryears and have not yet adjusted to the 85 scholarship limits?

I think those powerhouses in the mid- and late 90's could put it to these modern day teams simply because the modern teams have much smaller talent pools. The complexity of the game has also dropped off quite alot in the past two decades, with the mid- to late 90's sort of a bridge between the two generations. The '95 Huskers and '97 Huskers (or '97 Wolverines for that matter) would have demolished the '05 Trojans for instance because they had it all, whereas today even the best team has glaring weaknesses due to the limits in scholarships. The truth was going to be overly subjective when doing these polls simply because fans have short memories on what the fair playing fields were back then compared to today. Just as I have bias towards my favourite Huskers, people today in California have bias towards their Trojans. And since there are more people in LA than the whole of Nebraska I have a feeling the Trojans will win every poll on the subject.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Yeah it's always whatever team in the present year is dominating. They're somehow always the best team ever. I think the 1991 Washington Huskies would have KILLED this years Trojans. Do I think they're overrated in this case? Yes. But, do I think they are the best team in the country right now? Yes. Are they going to beat Texas? Yes. But, they are certainly not the best team of all time, especially since most of the teams in college football are sort of down this year.

Agreed. Football unites.

I don't know. If you would have argued the 92 team...you might have been more convincing. It does seem, however that 78% disagree with you

05 Trojans VS 91 Huskies

I know that you are a "homer" and that is why you went with the Huskies, but I don't think that they were talented enough across the board to beat them. Other than Brunell, no one on that team had any real pro career. Emtman was servicable at best.

 

[MadRat]

The '91 Huskies didn't need to be across the board better, just where it counted. I don't think '05 Notre Dame could compete with any of those past champions and they damn near handed USC its first loss. Fact is that the '91 Washington team had 105 scholarships, hence it likely did have more than enough talent across the board. People around the college football scene seem completely oblivious to the difference in twenty scholarships. Its no big deal when on paper but its absolutely huge in reality.

 

[BlancoNino]

Desmond Howard (who did go on to have an NFL career) caught 1 pass in the rose bowl against the Huskies. Bottom line is, Washington beat their toughest opponents on the road and they beat all of their opponents by a better margine than USC did.

As far as the mid 90's Nebraska teams go? Yeah, I think they'd beat the Trojans too. Their defense (Grant Wistrom, oh yeah!) was excellent and their running game was unstoppable. I remember their fullback Joel Mackovicka (SP?) chewing up every opponent; Another solid sign of dominance.

 

[KLin]

We'll see just how "overrated" they are on Wednesday night.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: KLin
We'll see just how "overrated" they are on Wednesday night.

Oh, trust me. USC will dismantle Texas. I predict USC to win by 24.

 

[hdeck]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: KLin
We'll see just how "overrated" they are on Wednesday night.

Oh, trust me. USC will dismantle Texas. I predict USC to win by 24.

i will mark this thread after we win the game so i can come laugh at you.

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: hdeck

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: KLin
We'll see just how "overrated" they are on Wednesday night.

Oh, trust me. USC will dismantle Texas. I predict USC to win by 24.

i will mark this thread after we win the game so i can come laugh at you.

Right back at ya bud.

 

[hdeck]

mark may has turned into a brainwashed, incoherent rambler. i honestly think espn is paying these guys to hype up usc more and more rather than actually analyze the match up.

it doesn't even matter anymore. if usc wins everyone will just think that is what was supposed to happen, no big deal. if texas wins it will be a shock but then they will keep talking about how amazing usc's streak was.

 

[conehead433]

Never thought I would miss Trev Alberts. Opinionated thought he was, at least could give a good breakdown of a team.

 

[BlancoNino]

3 Names on defense:

Darnell Bing

Frostee Rucker

Keith Rivers

On offense, I predict Bush to have a "decent" game and White to be able to pound the ball inside for maybe a touchdown.

Other than that, it's going to be Leinart spreading out the defense and throwing. Watch for Dominique Byrd to have an excellent game and pick up a lot of first downs.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: hdeck
mark may has turned into a brainwashed, incoherent rambler. i honestly think espn is paying these guys to hype up usc more and more rather than actually analyze the match up.

I agree.

My only thought is that USC has brought better ratings to College Football (not that they need it) and everyone is trying to capitalize on that. But there are a lot of experts and writers from ESPN picking Texas to win.

 

[dethman]

breakdown on all those espn voting polls shows all voting is geographical, therefore all this idiot rambling is pretty pointless.

 

[her209]

I went to USC so you know where my money's going.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: her209
I went to USC so you know where my money's going.

Loans that you need to pay off?

 

[Deleted member 4644]

Originally posted by: bR

Originally posted by: her209
I went to USC so you know where my money's going.

Loans that you need to pay off?

Um, more likely loans that he paid off after his first year out of school.

 

[destrekor]

the 2002 OSU Buckeye's woulda beat them...
but, why compare the past?
the buckeye's this year woulda fared a great chance against USC
notre dame was the only challenging team USC played this season... so of course they should be undefeated, but they aren't a godly team lol
play the big 10, then see what there record woulda been
still say osu should be playing them this year for the championship, but osu screwed up against texas and penn st.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: MadRat
Are teams really down are OR are you just used to seeing the typical 105 scholarship powerhouses of yesteryears and have not yet adjusted to the 85 scholarship limits?

I think those powerhouses in the mid- and late 90's could put it to these modern day teams simply because the modern teams have much smaller talent pools. The complexity of the game has also dropped off quite alot in the past two decades, with the mid- to late 90's sort of a bridge between the two generations. The '95 Huskers and '97 Huskers (or '97 Wolverines for that matter) would have demolished the '05 Trojans for instance because they had it all, whereas today even the best team has glaring weaknesses due to the limits in scholarships. The truth was going to be overly subjective when doing these polls simply because fans have short memories on what the fair playing fields were back then compared to today. Just as I have bias towards my favourite Huskers, people today in California have bias towards their Trojans. And since there are more people in LA than the whole of Nebraska I have a feeling the Trojans will win every poll on the subject.

That's a bunch of BS that you can't make due with 85 scholarships. You can go 3 deep at all 22 positions and more. What else do you need? A player on scholarship that doesn't even get on the field? While more is always better, it doesn't play that big of a deal.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: destrekor
the 2002 OSU Buckeye's woulda beat them...
but, why compare the past?
the buckeye's this year woulda fared a great chance against USC
notre dame was the only challenging team USC played this season... so of course they should be undefeated, but they aren't a godly team lol
play the big 10, then see what there record woulda been
still say osu should be playing them this year for the championship, but osu screwed up against texas and penn st.

Talk about fan bias. OSU would be playing if they handled their business like USC and UT.

 

[Parrotheader]

USC's a great team, but ESPN could be setting themselves up for one of the biggest cases ever of foot-in-mouth syndrome. Am I wrong or is USC's season not quite over yet? Shouldn't they at least make sure USC finishes the season undefeated before comparing them to the greatest teams ever?

As impressive as this year's offensive unit is, I'd personally take last year's unit any day over this one. The offense was still powerful, but the defense on last year's team was much more impressive IMO.