Southern California Is The Best Team In The Country! [Archive]

UNHWildCats

January 1st, 2009, 07:06 PM

Reign of Terrier

January 1st, 2009, 07:26 PM

There offense is not consistent enough to be considered the best IMO.

LehighFan11

January 1st, 2009, 07:38 PM

xrulesx xrulesx xrulesx xrulesx

Yea too bad they choked on the road at Oregon St.

UNHWildCats

January 1st, 2009, 07:41 PM

no worse then Florida losing at home to Mississippi or Oklahoma losing at Texas...

Skjellyfetti

January 1st, 2009, 07:42 PM

They have allowed more then 10 points twice.

Six times they held their opponent to zero TDs (3 shutouts, 3 games allowing just a FG)

In 12 games they allowed 103 points and allow just 206 yards per game.

They have so far shut down a very good Penn State offense.

And oh ya.... USC's offense aint too shabby either.

Do you mean they are the best defense?

I don't think they are better than Oklahoma or Florida, but I would LOVE to see a split title again.

Reign of Terrier

January 1st, 2009, 08:16 PM

no worse then Florida losing at home to Mississippi or Oklahoma losing at Texas...

Florida wasn't playing their best until after that game. The thing is Florida's defense during their little stretch has played just as good as USC's. Most of the TDs scored against Florida during their win streak have been in garbage time. USC doesn't have much garbage time because they don't seem to score as many points.

UNHWildCats

January 1st, 2009, 08:28 PM

UNH_Alum_In_CT

January 1st, 2009, 08:36 PM

This season may be the strongest argument for a FBS playoff system yet. We'll never know how USC would have done, especially if they had to actually play one of their playoff games away from La-La Land. And Texas-Oklahoma is an even stronger argument for playoffs.

Never going to happen though because the BCS schools would have to give too much control back to the NCAA. xrotatehx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

McNeese75

January 1st, 2009, 08:37 PM

Reign of Terrier

January 1st, 2009, 08:46 PM

Since the Mississippi game, Florida has allowed almost as many points in the fourth quarter (50) as USC has allowed in total (56).

I'm not saying Florida doesnt have a good D, they do, I just think USC has a better D... Maybe the best D ever.

I think USC has the best D too but I also think that Florida is probably second. Those points are scored because of "Garbage time" and Florida is up 30 or 40 so Urban Myer benches the starters. USC hasn't been able to put the second string in because there offense hasn't got them in such a big lead consistantly against quality opponents.

Florida is better because there offense has put up points consistently on good defenses and sure they don't have shut outs but they have blowouts. Florida has only allowed 20+ (The Mississippi loss, and to 2-then top 10 teams) points in 3 games and has scored 30 points in all but 1 game.

We'll never know for sure because there is no playoff:p and as long as USC drops a game to a team they shouldn't they have no chance to prove it (Florida can drop a game they play in a conference that impresses voters giving them a boost in the polls)

Reign of Terrier

January 1st, 2009, 08:50 PM

McNeese75

January 1st, 2009, 09:00 PM

UNH_Alum_In_CT

January 1st, 2009, 09:28 PM

no worse then Florida losing at home to Mississippi or Oklahoma losing at Texas...

FWIW, USC losing at Oregon State and Florida losing at home to Ole Miss is WAY different than Oklahoma losing to Texas (neutral field in Dallas (Cotton Bowl) BTW), tickets are split 50-50 between the schools). IMO, Texas has the biggest bitch in the BCS charade.

JohnStOnge

January 1st, 2009, 10:15 PM

no worse then Florida losing at home to Mississippi or Oklahoma losing at Texas...

Well, I might agree on the losing to Mississippi thing but I think losing to Texas is a little bit more "understandable" than losing to Oregon State. Texas is a team that was one play away from going to the Big 12 championship game as a heavy favorite to win and go on to the BCS title game.

As always...too bad there are no playoffs so that a true champion could be crowned. Might not always be the best team but it'd always be the true champion and, if it were set up like FCS is, very unlikely that any team that had a realistic shot at winning it would be left out of the tournament and thereby given a shot.

One thing about USC and the Rose Bowl, though: That's always a home game for them. I wonder if the outcome would've been the same if today's game would've been played at Penn State where the maximum temperature today was 26 and winds were gusting to near 30 mph.

I'm from the South but that, to me, is one of the biggest "unfair" things about the bowl system. In big post season games, teams built to play in the north and upper midwest during the winter time always have to play teams from the South, California, etc., under "their" conditions. It's not like the NFL where a team from say, Miami or San Diego, might have to go play a postseason game outdoors at, say, Pittsburgh or New England.

JohnStOnge

January 1st, 2009, 10:24 PM

Typical West coast crap. PC cries every year when his team is not in the "Mythical" championship game and will of course claim they should be NC this year like he does every year. Texas OK and probably Florida would take them to the woodshed this year xnodx

Well, I don't know if they wouldn't beat Texas, Oklahoma, or Florida if they got a chance to play them but I will say that power ratings did not generally peg them as the best team going into the bowl season and probably won't after it's all said and done either. You can see that at http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare.htm . Whoever wins between Oklahoma and Florida is obviously going to end up #1 in the majority of power ratings.

And power ratings "look" objectively at how impressive teams' performances were in terms of scores, etc. I mean, the process of setting them up might not be entirely objective. They all have their ideas as to what works best. But to me when you look at a bunch of different power rating systems and you see something like USC rated 4th on average after the regular season they clearly did not have the most impressive performance in terms of who they beat, how much they beat them by, etc.

UNHWildCats

January 1st, 2009, 10:29 PM

Well, I might agree on the losing to Mississippi thing but I think losing to Texas is a little bit more "understandable" than losing to Oregon State. Texas is a team that was one play away from going to the Big 12 championship game as a heavy favorite to win and go on to the BCS title game.

As always...too bad there are no playoffs so that a true champion could be crowned. Might not always be the best team but it'd always be the true champion and, if it were set up like FCS is, very unlikely that any team that had a realistic shot at winning it would be left out of the tournament and thereby given a shot.

One thing about USC and the Rose Bowl, though: That's always a home game for them. I wonder if the outcome would've been the same if today's game would've been played at Penn State where the maximum temperature today was 26 and winds were gusting to near 30 mph.

I'm from the South but that, to me, is one of the biggest "unfair" things about the bowl system. In big post season games, teams built to play in the north and upper midwest during the winter time always have to play teams from the South, California, etc., under "their" conditions. It's not like the NFL where a team from say, Miami or San Diego, might have to go play a postseason game outdoors at, say, Pittsburgh or New England.
And Oregon State was one win away from going to the BCS Rose Bowl.

Oregon State is a very very good team

JohnStOnge

January 1st, 2009, 10:30 PM

If he didn't lose to teams he should beat down (bad) he wouldn't have to whine. Every year they have a top 5 recruiting class there is no reason why he should not win every single game on the schedule-not because the teams he plays are bad but USC is so good.

In his defense, one thing I DO think is that people tend to under rate the Pac 10. It's 5-0 in this year's bowl games. And the only non conference game USC has lost since September of 2002 was that barnburner BCS championship game against Texas in 2005. I haven't looked it up but just from kind of paying attention I'd bet the Pac 10 has a winning record head to head against the SEC during the BCS era. If not it's very close.

In my opinion, the main thing that's kept USC away from winning more BCS titles than it has is other Pac 10 teams. Meanwhile, USC has pretty much clubbed every SEC team it's played in recent years. I live in SEC territory and I'm kind of a fan of the SEC but I think this thing about the PAC 10 being weak flies in the face of the reality of what's happened on the field.

Gil Dobie

January 1st, 2009, 11:02 PM

no worse then Florida losing at home to Mississippi or Oklahoma losing at Texas...

Texas and Oklahoma are better than USC xthumbsupx

Loss to Oregon St xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx

Touchdown Yosef

January 1st, 2009, 11:02 PM

And Oregon State was one win away from going to the BCS Rose Bowl.

Oregon State is a very very good team

That was put over Penn State's knee and spanked.

Maybe if the Pac 10 played a Champ game they would have had the opportunity to redeem themselves.

I just wish that USC would have been matched up with Texas or Alabama instead of Penn State.

petethepenguin15

January 1st, 2009, 11:04 PM

And Oregon State was one win away from going to the BCS Rose Bowl.

Oregon State is a very very good team

If Oregon State is so good how did they get destroyed by Oregon last week.

So Cal is not the best but their good beating Penn State isnt that big of a deal

Gil Dobie

January 1st, 2009, 11:08 PM

If Oregon State is so good how did they get destroyed by Oregon last week.

So Cal is not the best but their good beating Penn State isnt that big of a deal

How did Oregon St lose to Stanford, Penn St, Utah and Oregon? xeyebrowx

Reign of Terrier

January 2nd, 2009, 12:18 AM

In his defense, one thing I DO think is that people tend to under rate the Pac 10. It's 5-0 in this year's bowl games. And the only non conference game USC has lost since September of 2002 was that barnburner BCS championship game against Texas in 2005. I haven't looked it up but just from kind of paying attention I'd bet the Pac 10 has a winning record head to head against the SEC during the BCS era. If not it's very close.

In my opinion, the main thing that's kept USC away from winning more BCS titles than it has is other Pac 10 teams. Meanwhile, USC has pretty much clubbed every SEC team it's played in recent years. I live in SEC territory and I'm kind of a fan of the SEC but I think this thing about the PAC 10 being weak flies in the face of the reality of what's happened on the field.

The only game I can remember is when USC played Auburn when they were preseason #1 (I think USC beat the crap out of them) but I doubt that team was the best in the SEC. Honestly I doubt you can really use that as a comparison because before Carroll USC wasn't the best Pac 10 team in the BCS era (I think they were quite horrid).

Further more I'm not impressed with the Pac 10. Cal beat a Miami team that ain't quite there yet, Arizona beat a BYU team that got the crap beaten out of them by every good team they played (TCU, Utah), Oregon state beat a Pitt team that came from a weak Big East (and who also lost to Bowling Green). Oregon did impress me though they beat a very good Oklahoma State team.

Honestly there is a difference between playing a team during the regular season and a bowl game just look at Georgia Tech.

seantaylor

January 2nd, 2009, 01:20 AM

USC and Texas are the best two teams. USC absolutely rapes SEC teams when they play them.

elcid96

January 2nd, 2009, 01:47 AM

USC and Texas are the best two teams. USC absolutely rapes SEC teams when they play them.

Florida would shut USC out.

DuckDuckGriz

January 2nd, 2009, 01:57 AM

Florida would shut USC out.

xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

Tod

January 2nd, 2009, 07:21 AM

Florida would shut USC out.

Actully, I believe Florida would lose that game, and badly.

But...we'll never know.

Thunderstruck84

January 2nd, 2009, 10:18 AM

If the Pac 10 is this good the Mountain West must be awesome!

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2009, 11:06 AM

The only game I can remember is when USC played Auburn when they were preseason #1 (I think USC beat the crap out of them) but I doubt that team was the best in the SEC.

By the count I did just now the Pac 10 is 10-7 vs. the SEC during the BCS era. In 2006 USC played AT Arkansas and beat the Hogs 50-14. Arkansas went on to finish 7-1 in the SEC during the regular season with its only loss being by 5 to 11-2 LSU. Then Arkansas lost the SEC title game to eventual BCS champ Florida by 10. In 2007 Cal, which went 3-6 in the Pac 10, beat SEC East champ Tennessee by 14 to open the season.

I didn't do all leagues but I'm confident just in kind of noticing as I went through that there is no basis in the results of games between BCS leagues for concluding that the Pac 10 is "weak." I do think the SEC is probably a bit stronger over the long term. But I don't think the difference is great.

The SEC is my favorite BCS league but I don't ignore reality like many other SEC fans do. You'd have to be a complete idiot not to realize that USC would've been a serious threat to win the SEC title every year during 2002 - 2008 if it'd been in that league.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2009, 11:10 AM

If the Pac 10 is this good the Mountain West must be awesome!

What happened to the Pac 10 this year in non conference play against non BCS leagues was pretty weird. But it doesn't change what's happened over the long term; especially in games against other BCS leagues.

Reign of Terrier

January 2nd, 2009, 11:18 AM

By the count I did just now the Pac 10 is 10-7 vs. the SEC during the BCS era. In 2006 USC played AT Arkansas and beat the Hogs 50-14. Arkansas went on to finish 7-1 in the SEC during the regular season with its only loss being by 5 to 11-2 LSU. Then Arkansas lost the SEC title game to eventual BCS champ Florida by 10. In 2007 Cal, which went 3-6 in the Pac 10, beat SEC East champ Tennessee by 14 to open the season.

I didn't do all leagues but I'm confident just in kind of noticing as I went through that there is no basis in the results of games between BCS leagues for concluding that the Pac 10 is "weak." I do think the SEC is probably a bit stronger over the long term. But I don't think the difference is great.

The SEC is my favorite BCS league but I don't ignore reality like many other SEC fans do. You'd have to be a complete idiot not to realize that USC would've been a serious threat to win the SEC title every year during 2002 - 2008 if it'd been in that league.

Tennessee was not the best team in the east last year. They hardly beat Vandy, they got destroyed by Alabama and Florida. Had Georgia not have screwed up they would have won the east. (They were the best team in the east)

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2009, 11:30 AM

Tennessee was not the best team in the east last year. They hardly beat Vandy, they got destroyed by Alabama and Florida. Had Georgia not have screwed up they would have won the east. (They were the best team in the east)

They were good enough to go 6-2 in the SEC during the regular season. Cal went 3-6 in the Pac 10. It's just one game. But if you look at the games over the years between the two leagues there's just no way to make the argument that the SEC is overwhelmingly superior. Nor is there any way to make the argument that the Pac 10 has problems being competetive with other BCS leagues in general in interconference play. By my count just now, for instance, the Pac 10 was 10-8 in games against other BCS teams this season.

Granted the Mountain West thing this year was pretty weird. But I think if you go back over the BCS era and look at all the games the Pac 10 has played against other BCS leagues you're going to see a winning overall record. I also wouldn't be surprised if they have a winning record against each of the other BCS leagues. I'm telling you there is just no basis in what's actually happened when teams from different BCS leagues have played each other for thinking the Pac 10 is weak.

GrizFanStuckInUtah

January 2nd, 2009, 11:55 AM

I think USC is the best team in CA......They would beat the Raiders anyway :D

LacesOut

January 2nd, 2009, 11:57 AM

USC is definitely in the top 4:

Oklahoma
Florida
Texas
USC

grizband

January 2nd, 2009, 12:04 PM

USC is definitely in the top 4:

Oklahoma
Florida
Texas
USC
At this point, its really these four, and everybody else. Legitimately, any of these four teams deserved a spot in the BCS title game.

nwFL Griz

January 2nd, 2009, 12:26 PM

Nor is there any way to make the argument that the Pac 10 has problems being competetive with other BCS leagues in general in interconference play.

Without checking, I'd be willing to bet that same statement is true for all BCS conferences. Anymore, with the scholarship limits, there just is not a lot of difference between the conferences. Year-to-year, one team might be better than the rest, but as a whole, the conferences will be very close.

FCS_pwns_FBS

January 2nd, 2009, 01:05 PM

A 14-point win over the obese-10 champs and they are the best team in the country?

seantaylor

January 2nd, 2009, 07:05 PM

A 14-point win over the obese-10 champs and they are the best team in the country?

Penn State would beat everyone in the SEC besides Florida.

nwFL Griz

January 2nd, 2009, 07:09 PM

Penn State would beat everyone in the SEC besides Florida.

As much as it pains me to say this......I highly doubt Penn St would beat Alabama.

ngineer

January 2nd, 2009, 08:20 PM

Everybody looks at these games as if the outcome should be foregone because of what everyone sees on paper. We're dealing with 18-23 year olds whose heads are never necessarily focused. Coaches bang their heads against the wall at times wondering if they've been talking to it. That's the beauty of college football. Despite the records, one is never 100% sure of what you're going to see.

UNCBears2010

January 2nd, 2009, 10:27 PM

I'm quite confident that Oklahome would put AT LEAST 30 points on the USC defense, probably 40 or more.

Franks Tanks

January 3rd, 2009, 12:06 AM

As much as it pains me to say this......I highly doubt Penn St would beat Alabama.

That Big Bad Bama team that looked less athletic then Utah?

Big Al

January 3rd, 2009, 12:13 AM

That Big Bad Bama team that looked less athletic then Utah?

I think Utah would take it right to Penn State. The only question marks for me are USC and Florida. I would looove to see someone derail the Pete Carroll football train!

nwFL Griz

January 3rd, 2009, 12:31 AM

That Big Bad Bama team that looked less athletic then Utah?

Hey, we weren't alking about Utah, were we?

I live down here, and I've tried to tell everyone since the bowl match-ups were announced that Utah is a good team, and not to think that it would be like Hawaii last year.

Regardless, I stick by my comment that Bama would beat Penn St.

Big Al

January 3rd, 2009, 12:39 AM

Regardless, I stick by my comment that Bama would beat Penn St.

Possibly. I think it would be helluva good game, regardless.

Gil Dobie

January 3rd, 2009, 08:08 AM

Hey, we weren't alking about Utah, were we?

I live down here, and I've tried to tell everyone since the bowl match-ups were announced that Utah is a good team, and not to think that it would be like Hawaii last year.

Regardless, I stick by my comment that Bama would beat Penn St.

It would be a much closer game than USC - Penn St was. xoopsx