Re: Bradford That's one. Name another. Face it. SC had its chances and could not come through with less than two losses. Them's the breaks kid. I wonder where all these people are - other than soCal and Gawja - that you, JO'Co, and the talking heads are saying think that GA and SC are the two best teams in the country. Certainly not the midwest or the plains states or Texas or most of the south or the east coast. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we should introduce a new element into the BCS rankings: Exemptions for losses with players injured. How many players have to be injured to qualify for this exemption? What positions? How did the injuries affect the team's ability to score touchdowns? to defend against the opponent's running game? Plus roughly 96 other qualifying conditions.
ok <r>Give me a minute and I'll give you all you can read.<br/> <br/> I'm sure the New Orleans Chamber of Commerce and the 'midwest' aren't interested in it.. Every fan of the BCS system is now praying for a Ohio State win. One trip to yahoo sports front page and there's this:<br/> <QUOTE><s> </e></QUOTE> <br/> If Ohio State wins it, no beef... If LSU does, lots of beef.</r>
Hey it's not just USC who has a beef, with no playoff and no undefeated teams and only 1 contender with a single loss...then that means a whole bunch of 2 loss teams might think that only the odd circumstances surrounding how these teams get ranked...ie timing of their loss and stuff like that keep them from being in that game instead of LSU. How many times during the 14 straight top 5 seasons with bowl wins for FSU did people say after their bowl win that they might be the best team in the country. They usually lost to Miami early.
from whom? All you've done is post a column from a guy trying to earn a living by jumping on the hot-topic-of-the-day bandwagon. You're not hearing me. To the vast majority of college football fans, it's a non-issue. The Rose Bowl was a mismatch that proves nothing other than USC is a much better team than Illinois. The Sugar Bowl was a mismatch that proves nothing other than Georgia is a much better team than Hawaii. You are beating a dead horse.
Corey lives in Alabama...they beat dead mules there!! In Texas we beat dead Buros! Horese are way too valuable. What do you guys beat in Indiana!!
Sid <t>your point is taken. My point is this. LSU's coach called out the entire Pac10 and even though the on field results have shown his claims to be bunk, he's never had to be accountable for it.<br/> <br/> In fact, he's had his losses rationalized away..They were beaten by a Kentucky team that the media told you was good. Let's take a peek at them.<br/> <br/> Kentucky rolled early with wins over Eastern Kentucky and Ball State. Then they squeeked past a God awful Louisville team. They beat Arkansas (more on that later) and Florida Atlantic. (hey! its a bowl team)<br/> <br/> They then lost to South Carolina in perhaps SCAR's last 'healthy' game of the year.. SCAR was a team ripped apart by defensive injuries for those who don't watch SEC football. They then beat LSU but lost close to Florida. Then Kentucky was clocked by a Mississippi State team that hadn't clocked anyone all year. They then squeeked out a win over Vandy before losing to both Georgia and Tennessee. They did win their bowl game.. Over a very, very average Florida State team that was playing with half its roster.. At what point in time does the loss to Kentucky become a 'bad' loss?<br/> <br/> They also lost, at home, to Arkansas.<br/> Arkansas beat: Troy, Chattanooga, North Texas, Ole Miss, Florida INTERNATIONAL, a dead in the water South Carolina team, Miss State and of course, LSU... late in the year.. with all the expectations of #1 riding on LSU's shoulders.<br/> <br/> Arkansas lost to every dang one else and they got gutted by Tennessee and Missouri this season.<br/> <br/> Every conventional case that has been used to dismiss other teams in the past has been ignored to make room for LSU. Its a pill I refuse to swallow. <br/> <br/> I could bite into it if LSU was a team that had looked great over the course of the year but that's not the case either. Do championship teams based on defense give up 50 points at home in a loss in late November?<br/> <br/> I get why people discount USC, I do. What I don't get is why LSU has received the pass?<br/> <br/> You can't tell me that if we had a game held in KC this weekend pitting either USC or Georgia against LSU for all the marbles, that you'd pick LSU. I don't think most SEC fans would either.</t>
Sure if we had a playoff at the end of the season, I think USC, Georgia being teams that are hot would be ones to look to make the finals. It's why sometimes we have wildcard teams in the Super Bowl, and why the Astros made it to the WS a couple of years ago (wildcard). But that's not how the BCS works, we all know it is flawed.
Don't forget Oklahoma........and by all means, don't forget Hawaii, who has only one loss. :twisted: :twisted: Corey, if your beef is with the comment Miiles made months ago, I don't blame you for taking on LSU. It was a stupid thing to say, and I'm betting that someday what goes around will come back around to bite him in the butt.
one <r>can only wish Sid..but it won't happen.<br/> <br/> While Georgia (they of the travel nowhere fame) is actually headed out to Arizona State next year, LSU has a line-up featuring:<br/> <br/> North Texas, Tulane, Troy and TBD. All 4 at home.. even TBD doesn't appear to have enough draw to get the Tigers to leave Louisiana <E></E> But hey, if they can run their mouths, lose to bad football teams at home and still get a giftwrap NC title shot.. what incentive is there to leave?<br/> <br/> This system blows and its geared unfairly to benefit the few. The game is hard enough itself (as this crazy season has shown), but to have to beat your opponents and the system isn't right.</r>
Well, I hate being in a position where I'm defending USC, but facts are facts. ALL of USC's defensive backs were down for the Stanford game. Mark Bradford caught the winning TD pass over a WALK-ON. Much of their starting lineup, including linemen, linebackers, WRs and the starting QB were down for the entire middle part of the season. That's reality. Right now is the first time all year that they've had most of their players...
This is the same USC that Tebow comes in 5th in QB depth chart? They had so many injuries that they had to play non-scholarship players? Did they just not recruit DB's? Come on, everyone has injuries. Wait a minute, I think we lost to ULM because of injuries, yeah that's the ticket. :wink:
C'mon Jim. Were there any plays during that game when USC had less than 11 men on the field? You can't have it both ways. You can't claim on one hand that USC has monumental depth of HS all-stars and on the other hand that they could not field a full team because of injuries. Which is it? Stanford won. The game is over and in the books. Let it go.
Yeah I have to call BS on that as well Sid. I seriously doubt USC played all walkons against Stanford.
Wow. I guess I just like to make things up. BTW here's that kid who walked on to USC. He might have a scholarship by now, but he didn't have one the last time that I looked. He didn't play in either his junior or senior years of high school, nor did he play his first year at USC... http://usctrojans.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/mccurtis_mozique00.html Here's the play: Mozique McCurtis is #9. I'll see you guys. Goodbye.
Here's the Bio on Mozique #9 from the USC Scout Website. He's a Junior College kid.... Yeah he's just a lowly walkon.... lol...
Do we look that dumb that you soCal guys would try to sell us that horse hockey? Look at what Terry posted above. If the kid was not a superior athlete with superior talent, he would not have been on the field for USC at any time. What have you done that the devil has grabbed your soul and is forcing you to post all this pro-USC crap?
its not pro-USC <t>its anti-BCS. If you can't defend the most loathsome of characters, then you don't really believe what you are saying..or you are more 'anti' your rival than 'pro' your own belief structure.<br/> <br/> The BCS uses fear and ridicule to prevent moving forward. Somehow the results of this system have weight, when in reality they are just bullsh*t. They are a pepsi commercial. Its something someone is selling you.<br/> <br/> BTW, I started putting together that list of Stanford players and...well there is a LOT more than 5.. I just lost interest in it.. What I did notice was that Walt Harris was a giant POS. Looking at Stanford's roster, there are good players and some older guys that you have to wonder why Stanford bothered to recruit them at all. Was the career of that guy at Stanford just one giant bar bet? God his recruiting was awful.</t>
The problem is that the analysis of the USC recruiting machine is that it is relentless. They have AA's sitting on the bench and carrying water and equipment. Then in the middle of the season they are forced to use non-scholarship players (walk-on?)? Most teams have injury problems and even get down to third string players and some even win. Alabama had a walk-on start on defense. Of course he transferred in from another school and won a scholarship and ended up as one of our captains, so there are walkons and then there are walkons.
KP <t>you make good points.<br/> <br/> One of the biggest beefs I have with this is that the Stanford game was somehow this epic upset of the ages..<br/> <br/> Stanford wasn't the last place team in the Pac10, Washington was. Stanford also beat Cal, something Tennessee didn't do. They played TCU tight in a loss (38-36) By no means was Stanford a great, or even good team. They just weren't as bad as people made them out to be..The real story in this game was that it was one of the worst sports lines ever laid out by Vegas..<br/> <br/> It was a huge upset, no doubt about it though.<br/> <br/> Still, I think some of you guys should watch a tape of that USC-Stanford game. Listen to the names you DONT hear....or watch the guys (in huge number) being carried off the field..or couldn't finish the game after trying to give it a go.<br/> <br/> As an ND fan, I find it funny because Carroll was taking a ton of heat in the USC camp for having practices that are 'too physical' while ND fans were whining that aren't practices aren't physical enough.. Peetey Von Polesmoker has an incredible amount of depth and that allows him to hold brutally physical, and highly competitive practices..but every now and then, a perfect storm hits and you get nipped in the butt.</t>